The  person  charging  this  material  is  re- 
sponsible for  its  return  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books 
are  reasons  for  disciplinary  action  and  may 
result  in  dismissal  from  the  University. 


s 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/creedrevisioninpOOscha 


CEEED  EEVISION 


IN  THE 


PEESBTTEEIAN  OHUEOHES. 


DR.  SCHAFF’S  WORKS, 


HISTORY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH.  Fifth  edition,  revised 
and  enlarged,  1890. 

Vol.  I.  Apostolic  Christianity,  A.D.  1-100,  8vo,  $4,00, 

Vol.  II.  Ante-Nicene  Christianity,  A.D.  100-325.  8vo,  $4.00. 
Vol.  III.  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Christianity,  A.D.  311-600. 
8vo,  $4.00. 

Vol.  IV.  Mediaeval  Christianity,  A.D.  590-1073.  8vo,  $4.00. 

Vol.  VI.  Modern  Christianity — The  German  Reformation.  8vo, 
$4.00. 

THE  CREEDS  OF  CHRISTENDOM.  4th  edition,  revised,  3 vols.,1 884. 
8vo,  $15.00. 

Vol.  I.  History  of  Creeds. 

Vol.  II.  The  Greek  and  Latin  Creeds  (with  Translations). 

Vol.  III.  The  Protestant  Creeds  (with  Translations). 

THE  TEACHING  OF  THE  TIA^ELVE  APOSTLES  ; or,  THE  OLDEST 
CHURCH  MANUAL.  3d  edition,  revised  and  enlarged,  i889. 
8vo,  $2.50. 

ST.  AUGUSTIN,  MELANCTHON,  NEANDER.  Three  Biographies, 
1886.  12mo,  $1.00. 

THE  PERSON  OF  CHRIST:  the  Perfection  of  His  Humanity  Viewed 
as  a Proof  of  His  Divinity.  12th  edition,  1882.  12mo,  $1.00. 

BIBLE  DICTIONARY.  4th  edition,  1888.  $2.00. 

THROUGH  BIBLE  LANDS:  a Narrative  of  a Recent  Tour  in  Egypt 
and  the  Holy  Land.  With  Illustrations.  A new  edition,  with  a con- 
tribution from  Edouard  Naville  on  the  latest  Researches  in  Egypt 
and  their  bearing  upon  Bible  History,  1889.  12mo,  $2.25. 

CHRIST  AND  CHRISTIANITY:  Studies  In  Christology,  Creeds  and 
Confessions,  Protestantism  and  Romanism,  Reformation  Prin- 
ciples, Slavery  and  the  Bible,  Sunday  Observance,  Religious 
Freedom,  and  Christian  Union,  1885,  8vo,  $2.50. 

THE  PROGRESS  OF  RELIGIOUS  FREEDOM:  as  shown  in  the 
History  of  Toleration  Acts,  1889.  8vo,  $1.50. 

CHURCH  AND  STATE  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES;  or.  The  American 
Idea  of  Religious  Freedom  and  its  Practical  Effect,  1888.  8vo, 
$1.50. 

LITERATURE  AND  POETRY.  1890.  $2.50. 


CREED  REVISION 


IN  THE 


PKESBYTERIAN  CHURCHES 


BY 

PHILIP  SCHAFF,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

PROFESSOR  OP  CHURCH  HISTORY  IN  THE  UNION  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 
AT  NEW  YORK 

the  qf  the 

i’,  IQ'Jri 

»!SCSVF.RS!TY  0?  Iiutwts 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER’S  SONS 
1890 


COPYEIGHT,  1890, 
Bx  PHILIP  SCHAFF. 


TROWS 

PRINTtNG  AND  BOOKBINDING  COMPANY, 
NEW  YORK. 


^3  ?>5 

’ C 


PREFACE. 


The  General  Assembly  of  1889  lias  opened  a new  chapter 
in  the  history  of  American  theology.  This  chapter  involves 
some  of  the  profoimdest  problems  that  have  exercised  the  hu- 
man mind  since  the  days  of  St.  Paul,  and  have  never  yet  been 
satisfactorily  solved. 

The  Presbyterian  Creed  Revision  movement  is  inspired  by 
the  central  truth  of  God’s  saving  love  to  all  men  (John  iii.  16), 
and  the  corresponding  duty  of  preaching  the  gospel  to  every 
creature^  in  obedience  to  Christ’s  last  command  (Mark  xvi.  15  ; 
Matthew  xxviii.  19,  20).  This  truth  and  duty  have  taken  a deeper 
hold  on  the  mind  and  heart  of  the  living  Church  than  ever  be- 
fore, and  must  overrule  the  particularism  and  exclusivism  of  the 
Augustinian  and  Calvinistic  system,  with  its  doctrines  of  repro- 
bation, preterition,  and  the  wholesale  damnation  of  the  non- 
Christian  world. 

The  movement  cannot  be  traced  to  any  individual,  nor  to 
any  theological  school  or  party ; nor  has  it  any  leader.  Like 
the  Kingdom  of  God,  it  has  come  ‘‘  without  observation.”  It 
has  broken  out  suddenly,  though  not  without  long,  silent  prep- 
aration, and  is  spreading  with  astonishing  rapidity  over  the 
Presbyterian  Churches  in  Europe  and  America,  among  laymen 
as  well  as  ministers.  The  participation  of  intelligent  elders  in 
the  discussion  is  a striking  feature  which  distinguishes  it  from 
earlier  theological  controversies. 

The  discussion  has  been  conducted  so  far  with  admirable 
Christian  temper.  May  its  further  progress  give  an  example 
to  the  world  that  theologians  can  engage  in  a tournament  of 
thought  as  courteous  and  honorable  gentlemen,  with  malice 


VI 


PEEFACE. 


towards  none,  with  charity  for  all.”  In  battling  against  each 
other,  they  also  battle  for  a common  end — the  promotion  of 
truth  which  both  have  at  heart,  with  all  good  men,  as  the  su- 
preme object  of  their  desire. 

I was  unexpectedly,  thongh  not  unwillingly,  drawn  into  this 
discussion.  I take  my  stand  on  the  side  of  a revision  of  the 
Westminster  Creed,  in  accordance  with  the  advanced  stage  of 
theology  and  Christianity ; as  some  years  ago  I took  an  active 
part  in  the  revision  of  the  English  Version  of  the  Bible.  The 
two  movements  are  parallel,  and  look  to  the  same  end. 

The  first  essay  includes  an  article  which  was  prepared  for 
the  last  number  of  the  .Presbyterian  Peview  (October,  1889), 
but  is  nearly  doubled  in  size,  and  adapted  to  the  further  pro- 
gress of  the  movement.  In  response  to  a considerable  number 
of  encouraging  letters,  and  requests  for  more  copies  from  influ- 
ential ministers  and  elders  (including  three  ex-Moderators  of 
General  Assemblies  of  Scotland),  I resolved  to  publish  it  in 
this  improved  form.  The  second  paper  appears  as  delivered  in 
Presbytery.  Two  important  documents  are  appended,  which 
may  help  to  solve  the  problem  of  revision. 


Union  Theological  Seminary, 

New  York,  Deceiiiber  25, 1889. 


P.  s. 


CONTENTS, 


Creed  Eevision  and  the  Westminster  Standards,  . . 1-42 

A Plea  for  the  Eevision  of  the  Westminster  Confession,  . 43-51 

Documents  bearing  on  Eevision  : 

I The  New  Confession  and  Declaratory  Statement  of 

the  Presbyterian  Church  of  England,  . . 52-63 

II.  Action  of  the  New  York  Presbytery, 


64-67 


CREED  REVISION 


AND  THE 


■WESTMIJ^STEK  STAI^DAEDS. 


A Progresswe  Age, 

REYISION  is  in  the  air.  Some  years  ago  it  was  the  re- 
vision of  the  Bible ; now  it  is  the  revision  of  creeds. 
The  former  has  been  successfully  accomplished  without  doing 
any  harm  either  to  the  Bible  or  to  Bible  readers ; the  latter 
will  be  accomplished  at  no  distant  day,  with  the  same  result  of 
sundry  improvements  in  minor  details  without  detriment  to  the 
substance.  The  Bible-revision  movement  extended  over  the 
whole  Protestant  world,  and  resulted  in  a material  improve- 
ment of  the  Authorized  English,  German,  Dutch,  Swedish,  and 
Danish  versions ; the  Creed  revision  movement,  so  far,  is  con- 
fined to  the  Presbyterian  churches  of  America  and  Great 
Britain,  but  may  soon  spread  to  other  evangelical  denomina- 
tions which  have  formulated  confessions  of  faith.  The  result 
will  be  to  bring  them  nearer  together,  on  the  basis  of  a consen- 
sus in  essentials,  liberty  in  non-essentials,  and  charity  in  all 
things. 

AYe  live  in  an  age  of  research,  discovery,  and  progress,  and 
whosoever  refuses  to  go  ahead  must  be  content  to  be  left  behind 
and  to  be  outgrown.  AYhatever  lives,  moves ; and  whatever 
ceases  to  move,  ceases  to  live.  It  is  impossible  for  individual 
Christians  or  churches  to  be  stationary ; they  must  either  go 
forward,  or  go  backward. 


2 


CEEED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


Enlargement  of  the  Ajpostles’  and  Nicene  Creeds, 

Ilevision  of  creeds  is  not  a new  thing.  It  runs  through  the 
history  of  Christian  doctrine.  Creeds  are  tlie  mile-stones^ 
which  mark  the  stages  of  development  in  the  knowledge  of  re- 
vealed truth.  Every  creed  is  the  result  of  preceding  theolog- 
ical controversy^ 

The  Confession  of  Peter  and  the  baptismal  formula  are  the 
basis  of  the  Apostles’  Creed,  the  oldest  and  the  youngest  of  all 
creeds,  which  can  never  be  superseded.  The  Apostles’  Creed 
itself  is  a gradual  growth  of  three  or  four  centuries,  and  was 
not  completed  till  the  time  of  Jerome  and  Augustin.' 

The  Nicene  Creed  of  325  was  an  expansion  and  adaptation 
of  the  baptismal  confessions  of  Jerusalem  and  Caesarea,  and 
was  partly  abridged  and  partly  expanded  in  the  Constantino- 
politan  Creed  of  381,  the  damnatory  clause  against  Arianisrn 
being  omitted,  and  the  third  article,  on  the  Holy  Spirit,  being 
enlarged.^  This  was  a substantial  improvement.  In  this  re- 
vised shape,  it  became  the  accepted  creed  of  the  Eastern  and 
Western  churches,  till  two  centuries  afterward  a new  change 
was  made,  which  became  the  cause  of  the  greatest  schism  in 
Christendom. 

The  addition  of  the  Filioqiie  (which  means  the  docti'ine  of 
the  double  procession  of  the  Holy  Spirit)  was  a misimprove- 
ment,  and  furnishes  the  first  example  of  unauthorized,  unneces- 
sary, and  hurtful  revision.  It  was  made,  without  the  consent 
and  the  knowledge  of  the  Eastern  church,  by  the  churches  of 
Spain  and  Gaul,  and  at  first  resisted  by  Pope  Leo  III.,  but  ac- 
cepted by  his  successors  and  the  whole  West.  It  was  also 
adopted  by  the  evangelical  churches,  but  without  investigation. 
It  still  keeps  the  Greek  and  Latin  churches  apart,  and  must  be 
eliminated  before  peace  between  the  two  can  be  restored.  The 

’ See  the  varioiis  Rules  of  Faith  of  the  Ante-Niceno  Age,  and  the  gradual  ex- 
pansion of  the  Apostles’  Creed,  in  Schaff,  Creeds  of  Christendom^  vol.  ii,  11  sqq., 
and  45  sqq. 

2 A.  c.,  ii.,  57  sqq.,  and  voL  i.,  24-29. 


NEW  CREEDS  IN  THE  ROMAN  CHURCH. 


3 


Greek  cliurcli  believes  in  the  single  eternal  intertrinitarian 
cession  of  the  Spirit  from  the  Father  alone,  but  in  the  double 
temporal  inission  of  the  Spirit  from  the  Father  and  the  Son, 
and  appeals  to  the  farewell  discourses  of  Christ,  who  makes 
a distinction  between  procession  and  mission  (John  xv.  26). 
The  former,  like  the  eternal  generation  of  the  Son  by  the 
Father,  belongs  to  the  Trinity  of  essence,  the  latter  to  the  Trinity 
of  revelation,  and  began  with  the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost.  The  clause  might  have  been  enlarged, 
agreeably  with  this  distinction,  in  this  form  : ‘‘We  believe  in 
the  Holy  Ghost,  who  proceeds  from  the  Father,  and  is  sent  hy 
the  Father  and  the  BonP  ^ 

New  Creeds  in  the  Boman  CJmrch. 

The  Homan  Church  revises  her  creed  by  additions,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  Filioque  j ust  mentioned.  She  puts  her  standards 
on  a par  with  the  Bible,  and  cannot  give  them  up,  but  she  in- 
creases their  number  when  new  problems  are  to  be  solved.  To 
the  oecumenical  creeds,  which  are  the  inheritance  of  all  Chris- 
tendom, she  added  the  Tridentine  standards  in  the  sixteenth 
centuiy,  and  the  two  dogmas  of  the  immaculate  conception  of 
the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope  in  the  nine- 
teenth century.  The  Tridentine  standards  settle  the  questions 
raised  by  the  Protestant  Heformation ; the  Vatican  decrees 
refer  to  controversies  within  the  Roman  Church. 

Revision  of  Protestant  Creeds. 

Passing  to  Protestant  creeds,  they  admit  of  alteration  or  in- 
crease, as  may  be  deemed  best.  Hone  of  them  claims  infalli- 
bility, which  belongs  to  the  Word  of  God  alone.  The  19th 
Article  of  the  Church  of  England  says  : * “ As  the  Church  of 
Jerusalem,  Alexandria,  and  Antioch,  have  erred,  so  also  the 
Church  of  Rome  hath  erred,  not  only  in -their  living  and  man- 

^ On  the  History  of  the  Filioque  controversy,  see  Schaff,  Church  llist07'y^  vol.  iv., 
476  sqq. 


4 CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


^ ner  of  ceremonies,  but  also  in  matters  of  doctrine.”  The  Westj 
minster  Confession  declares,  in  cli.  xxv.  5 : The  purest  churches 
nnder  heaven  are  subject  both  to  mixture  and  error.”  Conse- 
j quently  the  purest  confessions  of  faith,  being  the  work  of  im- 
perfect and  fallible  men,  may  embody  error,  and  are  capable  of 
improvement.  The  knowledge  and  understanding  of  the  Bible 
is  progressive,  and  the  results  of  progress  should  from  time  to 
time  be  embodied  in  the  old  or  in  new  public  standards. 

The  first  doctrinal  deliverances  of  the  Ileformation  churches 
were  crude  experiments,  and  retain  only  a historical  interest. 
Such  are  the  Ninety -five  Theses  of  Luther,  the  Sixty-seven 
Conclusions  of  Zwingli,  the  Ten  Articles  of  the  Synod  of 
Berne,  the  Fifteen  Articles  of  Marburg,  the  First  Helvetic,  the 
Tetrapolitan,  and  the  Two  Scotch  Confessions.  They  were  fol- 
lowed by  maturer  statements,  and  these  again  have  undergone 
various  modifications  and  adaptations. 


Hemsion  of  the  Augsburg  Confession. 

The  Au<2i:sburo;  Confession  of  1530,  which  is  the  funda- 
mental  creed  of  the  Lutheran  church,  was  altered  by  its  author 
in  the  edition  of  1540,  especially  in  Article  X.,  which  treats  of 
the  real  presence  in  the  eucharist.  All  the  changes  were  real 
improvements  in  contents  and  form,  but  caused  a great  deal 
of  trouble,  and  \vere  never  properly  adopted  by  the  Lutheran 
church,  because  Melanchthon  made  them  in  his  individual 
capacity,  without  ofiicial  authority  or  consultation  with  Luther 
and  other  leading  theologians.  The  edition  of  1540  is  very 
valuable,  however,  for  the  history  of  the  later  Melanchthonian 
type  of  Lutheranism.  Melanchthon  dealt  with  this  document 
as  he  dealt  with  his  Loci  Theologici^  which  represent  in  their 
successive  editions  the  progress  of  his  knowledge  and  the 
changes  of  his  views  on  the  doctrines  of  predestination,  free 
will,  and  the  real  presence.  These  changes  were  rejected  in 
the  Formula  of  Concord,  the  last  of  the  Lutheran  symbols,  but 
reappeared  afterward  in  the  history  of  German  theology. 

If  the  Lutheran  Church  of  to-day  were  to  undertake  a re- 


THE  HEIDELBERG  CATECHISM. 


5 


vision  of  this  document,  the  changes  would  be  far  more  radical 
than  those  made  by  Melanchthon,  especially  in  Articles  IX. 
(which  condemns  the  Anabaptists  for  teaching  that  children 
are  saved  without  baptism”),  X.,  XL  (which  retains  private 
confession  and  absolution),  XYL,  XYIL,  XX.,  XXIL  The 
whole  Second  Part,  which  treats  of  seven  abuses,  with  special 
reference  to  the  controversies  of  the  sixteenth  century,  would 
probably  be  omitted  as  being  no  more  applicable  to  our  time, 
and  unsuitable  in  a confession  of  faith. 

The  Heidelberg  Catechism. 

The  Heidelberg  Catechism  of  1563  has  likewise  undergone 
a change,  but  a change  for  the  worse,  by  an  arbitrary  act  of 
Elector  Frederick  III. 

He  inserted,  in  the  third  edition,  the  eightieth  question, 
which  denounces  the  Roman  mass  as  an  ‘^accursed  idolatry.” 
This  question  roused  the  just  indignation  of  Roman  Catholics, 
and  provoked  persecution.  It  furnishes  another  instance  of 
an  unfortunate  and  hurtful  revision.  Polemics  have  no  proper^ 
place  in  a catechism.  I 

^Nevertheless,  the  Heidelberg  Catechism,  owing  to  its  in- 
trinsic merits,  is  almost  the  only  Reformed  symbol  from  the 
sixteenth  century  which  is  still  in  practical  use  in  the  Reformed 
churches  of  the  continent,  and  in  the  German  and  Dutch  Re- 
formed churches  of  America.  The  Dutch  Reformed  Church 
of  America  accepts  also  the  Belgic  Confession  and  the  Canons 
of  Dort,  which  have  long  ceased  to  have  authority  in  the 
national  Reformed  church  of  Holland. 

Ilemsion  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles. 

The  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England  from 
the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  were  an  abridgment  and  adjust- 
ment of  the  Forty-two  Articles  made  in  the  reign  of  King 
Edward  YI.  by  Archbishop  Cranmer  and  his  advisers. 

These  articles  were  revised  and  adapted  to  a new  state  of 


6 CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

tilings  by  tlie  American  Episcopal  Church  when  it  assumed  an 
organization  independent  of  the  English  government.' 

More  radical  changes  were  made  by  the  Reformed  Episco- 
palians after  their  secession  in  1874.^ 

John  Wesley  abridged  and  reduced  the  Thirty -nine  Articles 
to  Twenty-five,  chiefiy  by  omitting  the  Calvinistic  features 
(1784),  and  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United 
States  made  some  additional  alterations  in  1804.^ 

The  Anglican  Liturgy,  which  embodies  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles,  has  been  repeatedly  revised  under  Edward  YL,  Queen 
Elizabeth,  Charles  IL,  etc.,  and  is  now  again  subjected  to  various 
modifications  by  the  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States, 
some  of  which  were  adopted  by  the  General  Convention  of 
1889,  at  'New  York,  while  others  will  be  acted  upon  by  the 
Convention  of  1892. 


The  Westminster  Confession. 

The  Westminster  Assembly,  which  sat  from  1643  to  1652, 
in  the  Jerusalem  Chamber  of  the  Westminster  Deanery,  during 
the  reign  of  the  Long  Parliament,  began  with  a revision  of  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  but  having 
reached  the  fifteenth  article,  the  Assembly  abandoned  the  re- 
vision as  an  unprofitable  business,  and  with  great  care  prepared 
a new  confession  and  two  catechisms,  which  were  intended  for 
the  three  kingdoms  of  England,  Scotland,  and  Ireland,  but 
succeeded  only  in  Scotland.  The  Book  of  Discipline  and  the 
Directory  of  Worship  had  the  same  fate,  and  have  undergone 
several  changes. 

The  Westminster  Confession  of  1647  is  the  clearest  and 
strongest  statement  of  the  Calvinistic  (sometimes  wrongly  called 
the  Augustinian  ”)  system  of  doctrine.  It  is  framed  from  the 
standpoint  of  Divine  Sovereignty  and  Justice,  and  on  the  basis 
of  a close  alliance  of  Church  and  State.  The  Assembly  was 

1 The  English  and  American  revisions  are  given  in  parallel  columns  in  Creeds  of 
Christendom,  vol.  iii.,  480-516. 

2 Ibid.,  vol.  iii.,  814-828. 


3 Ibid.,  vol.  iii.,  807-813. 


THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION. 


7 


itself  the  creature  of  tlie  Long  Parliament,  appointed  and  paid 
by  it,  and  amenable  to  its  authority.  The  Confession  which 
was  sent  to  Parliament  under  the  title  of  “ The  Humble  Ad- 
vice,” assigns  to  the  civil  government  the  right  and  duty  of 
calling  synods,  protecting  orthodoxy,  and  punishing  heresy.  It 
thus  sanctions  the  jjrinciple  of  religious  persecution,  and  the 
Long  Parliament  acted  on  this  principle  by  the  expulsion  of 
about  two  thousand  clergymen  from  their  livings  for  non-con- 
formity to  Puritanism.^  The  Church  of  England,  after  the 
Pestoration,  fully  repaid  this  act  of  intolerance,  with  interest,  by 
expelling  and  starving  the  Puritan  ministers,  including  such 
men  as  Baxter  and  Bunyan,  for  non-conformity  to  episcopacy. 

Calvin  and  Beza  had  written  special  works  in  justification  of 
the  burning  of  Servetus.^  All  the  leading  divines  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  Protestant  as  well  as  Roman  Catholic,  with 
the  exception  of  a few  persecuted  Independents,  Baptists,  and 
Quakers,  regarded  religious  toleration  as  a dangerous  heresy 
and  a device  of  the  devil.  This  view  was  held  even  by  the 
venerable  and  liberal  Richard  Baxter,  and  by  the  Hew  England 
Puritans  in  the  days  of  expelling  Baptists,  hanging  Quakers, 
and  burning  witches.  The  principle  of  persecution,  to  the 

1 Dr.  John  Walker,  in  his  Attempt  towards  Recovering  an  Account  of  the  Numbers 
and  Siifferings  of  the  Clergy  of  the  Church  of  England^  Heads  of  Colleges^  Fellows^ 
Scholars^  who  were  sequestered^  harassed,  etc.,  in  the  late  times  of  the  Grand  Rebellion 
(London,  1714),  states  the  number  of  suffering  clergymen  at  8,000,  but  this  is  a gross 
exaggeration,  as  Neal  shows  in  his  History  of  the  Puritans,  Part  III. , ch.  iii.  (Harper’s 
ed.,  vol.  i.,  486  sq.).  The  respected  editor  of  a Presbyterian  paper  in  Pennsylvania, 
who  had  forgotten  this  fact,  charged  me  with  confounding  the  Episcopal  sufferers 
with  the  Puritan  sufferers  under  Charles  II. 

2 As  this  statement  has  been  denied  by  “ The  Mid-Continent”  of  St.  Louis, 
December  4,  1889,  p.  4,  I shall  give  the  title  of  Calvin’s  book:  Defensio  ortho- 
doxcefideide  sacra  trinitate  contra  prodigiosos  errores  Michaelis  Scrveti  Hispani 
ubi  ostenditur  hcereticos  jure  gladii  coercendos  essef  It  appeared  in  1554,  a few 
months  after  Servet’s  death,  and  is  republished  in  the  new  editioi^.of  Calvin’s  Opera 
by  the  Strasburg  Professors  Reuss,  etc.,  vol.  viii.,  483-644.  The  title  of  Beza’s 
tract  is:  “De  hcereticis  a civili  magistratu  puniendisj"'  etc.,  Geneva,  1554,  second 
ed.,  1592,  French  translation  by  Nic.  Colladon,  1560.  Calvin  wished  the  sword  to  be 
substituted  for  the  stake  in  the  case  of  Servetus  ; but  as  to  the  right  and  duty  of  the 
death  penalty  for  obstinate  heretics  he  had  not  the  slightest  misgiving,  and  it  is  only 
on  this  ground  that  his  conduct  in  that  tragedy  can  be  in  any  way  justified  or  at  least 
explained.  It  is  well  known  that  all  the  surviving  Reformers,  even  the  gentle 
Melanchthon,  fully  approved  of  it. 


8 CKEED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

extent  of  burning  heretics,  is  inseparable  from  the  union  of 
Clinrcli  and  State,  which  makes  a crime  against  the  Church 
also  a crime  against  the  State,  to  be  punished  according  to  law. 
If  the  practice  of  persecution  has  gone  out  of  use  even  in  the 
State  Churches  of  Europe,  it  is  a happy  inconsistency  which 
undermines  the  theory. 

It  is  but  just  to  say,  however,  that  Presbyterians,  notwith- 
standing their  strong  convictions  of  truth  and  hatred  of  error, 
which  caused  so  many  divisions  and  secessions,  have  suffered 
far  more  persecution  from  Pomanists  and  Anglicans  than  they 
have  inflicted  upon  others,  even  where  they  had  the  power,  as 
in  Scotland.  The  Presbyterian  Church  is,  practically,  the  most 
liberal  among  the  orthodox  Protestant  denominations,  and  is 
much  more  liberal  and  prosperous  since  the  reunion  of  the  Old 
and  Kew  School,  in  1869,  than  she  was  during  the  Thirty 
Years’  War  of  these  two  schools. 

Revision  of  the  Articles  on  Church  and  State,  1788. 

On  the  important  subject  of  the  relation  of  Church  and 
State,  and  the  right  of  religious  persecution,  public  sentiment 
has  undergone  a radical  revolution,  especially  in  England  and 
P’orth  America,  since  the  last  century.  The  principle  of  per- 
secution gave  way  first  to  the  principle  of  toleration,  and  then 
to  the  deeper  and  stronger  principle  of  religious  liberty,  which 
is  now  regarded  as  a fundamental  and  inalienable  right,  as  a 
gift  of  God,  the  only  Lord  of  the  conscience.  P^o  government 
has  a right  to  interpose  itself  between  God  and  man’s  conscience. 
This  principle  in  its  legitimate  development  leads  to  a peaceful 
separation  of  Church  and  State,  which  guarantees  full  liberty 
and  independence,  or  the  right  of  self-government  to  all  de- 
nominations, disconnecting  them  from  politics,  and  thereby 
making  civil  persecution  for  religious  opinions  impossible. 
Temporal  punishment  for  offences  against  the  State,  spiritual 
punishment  for  offences  against  the  Church. 

This  great  progress  was  effected  in  the  United  States  after 
the  Ee volutionary  War.  It  was  brought  about  by  the  provi- 


KEVISION  OF  THE  AKTICLES  ON  CHUKCH  AND  STATE,  1788.  9 

dence  of  God,  which  left  Congress  no  alternative  but  to  recog- 
nize and  guarantee  the  civil  and  religions  rights  of  all  citizens 
who  had  aided  in  the  achievement  of  national  independence. 
The  general  government  never  had  and  never  claimed  any  au- 
thority over  religious  and  ecclesiastical  affairs,  and  left  them  to 
the  separate  States ; but  the  States  which  formerly  exercised 
this  authority,  especially  in  Massachusetts  and  Yirginia,  grad- 
ually abandoned  it ; so  that  mutual  independence  of  Church  and 
State  is  now  the  general  American  system.  The  Reformers  of 
the  sixteenth  century  and  the  Westminster  Divines  would  have 
abhorred  our  system  as  a dangerous  heresy  and  as  downright 
political  atheism.  But  we  generally  accept  it  as  a much  better 
solution  of  the  vexed  problem  of  Church  and  State  than  either 
the  theocratic  or  the  Ccesaropapistic  (Erastian)  theories,  which 
have  been  the  fruitful  causes  of  endless  collisions  and  civil 
wars. 

In  this  important  matter  American  Presbyterianism  has  for- 
ever departed  from  the  old  Calvinism  and  the  Westminster 
standards.  The  ecclesiastico-political  clauses  in  chs.  xx.  4; 
xxiii.  3 ; xxxi.  1 and  2 of  the  Confession  were  altered  in  the 
same  year  in  which  the  Federal  Constitution  was  framed,  and 
were  adopted  by  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia,  May,  29,  1788.' 

Nobody  in  America  doubts  the  wisdom  and  necessity  of 
this  revision,  or  would  advocate  a return  to  the  old  theory  of 
the  union  of  Church  and  State.  The  American  Episcopal 
Church  had  to  make  a similar  alteration  in  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles.  England  and  Scotland,  too,  have  abandoned  the  the- 
ory of  persecution,  and  are  drifting  steadily  toward  the  Amer- 
ican system  of  separation  of  Church  and  State.  If  Americans 
hate  anything  it  is  the  principle  and  practice  of  religious  per- 
secution ; and  if  they  love  anything  it  is  civil  and  religious 
liberty,  as  guaranteed  by  their  Constitution. 

1 The  changes,  together  with  the  original  statements,  placed  in  parallel  columns, 
may  be  seen  in  SchaflTs  Creeds  of  Christendom^  vol.  i.,  p.  806  sqq. 


10  CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


Removal  of  a Restriction  on  Marriage^  1888.  Revision  of 

Proof  texts. 

On  another  point  also  the  Northern  General  Assembly  has 
altered  the  Confession  by  removing,  in  1888,  the  prohibition  of 
marrying  a deceased  wife’s  sister  (ch.  xxiv.  4).  It  is  difficult  to 
see  what  business  such  a prohibition  has  in  a Confession  of 
Faith,  even  if  it  were  well  founded. 

Besides  this,  the  General  Assembly,  on  the  overture  of  the 
Presbytery  of  Philadelphia,  appointed  a committee,  which  is 
charged  with  the  duty  of  revising  the  proof -texts  of  the  Con- 
fession— a duty  next  in  importance  to  a revision  of  the  text. 
The  old  proof-texts  were  already  once  altered  in  1792,  but  for 
the  worse,  by  incompetent  men.  The  new  committee  is  mak- 
ing satisfactory  progress,  and  will  report  to  the  Assembly  of 
1890.’ 


TJie  Doctrinal  Revision  of 

But  now  a more  serious  revision,  which  cuts  into  the  core  of 
scholastic  Calvinism— namely,  the  doctrine  of  predestination, 
is  demanded  by  a growing  sentiment,  which  repudiates  the  de- 
crees of  reprobation,  or  preterition,  as  unscriptural  and  incon- 
sistent with  the  justice  and  goodness  of  God.  The  Cumber- 
land Presbyterian  Church,  so  called,  dissents  from  the  strict 
Presbyterians  on  this  point,  and  has  altered  the  Confession  in 
a semi-Arminian  sense ; and  yet  that  body  was  admitted  into 
the  pan-Presbyterian  Council  at  Belfast  in  1884. 

During  the  last  year  the  Presbytery  of  Nassau  and  several 
other  Presbyteries  began  to  move  in  the  matter,  and  overtured 
the  General  Assembly,  which  was  held  in  the  city  of  New 
York,  May,  1889,  asking  that  proper  steps  be  taken  for  a revi- 
sion of  the  third  chapter  of  the  Confession  of  Faith,  with  espe- 
cial reference  to  Sections  3,  4,  G,  and  7.  After  some  discussion 

^It  is  surprising  how  generally  these  facts  of  previous  revisions  are  ignored  by 
the  anti-revisionists.  I have  not  seen  an  argument  on  their  side  which  could  not  be 
waged  against  the  previous  revisions  and  against  the  Westminster  Confession  itself. 


THE  DOCTKINAL  EEVISION  OF  1889. 


11 


on  the  point  alluded  to,  in  which  Professor  Duffield,  of  Prince- 
ton, advocated  an  elimination  of  the  supralapsarian  decree  of 
reprobation,  the  Assembly  unanimously  adopted  the  following 
resolution  : 

“ Whereas  overtures  have  come  to  the  General  Assembly  from  fifteen  Presbyte- 
ries, asking  for  some  revision  of  the  Confession  of  Faith  ; and  whereas,  in  the  opinion 
of  many  of  our  ministers  and  people,  some  forms  of  statement  in  our  Confession  are 
liable  to  misunderstanding,  and  expose  our  system  of  doctrine  to  unmerited  criticism ; 
and  whereas,  before  any  definite  steps  should  be  taken  for  revision  of  our  standards, 
it  is  desirable  to  know  whether  there  is  any  general  desire  for  revision  ; therefore, 

“Resolved,  That  this  General  Assembly  overture  to  the  Presbyteries  the  follow- 
ing questions  : 

“ ‘ (1.)  Do  you  desire  a revision  of  the  Confession  of  Faith  ? 

“ ‘ (2.)  If  so,  in  what  respects  and  to  what  extent  ? ’ ” 


This  action  is  wise  and  in  accordance  with  Presbyterian  cus- 
tom of  referring  questions  which  affect  the  organic  laws  of  the 
Church  to  the  Presbyteries,  as  the  primary  source  of  power. 
If  a majority  of  the  two  hundred  and  eleven  Presbyteries 
should  vote  against  revision,  the  movement  will  be  retarded 
for  the  present,  but  will  break  out  again  in  a new  form.  If  two- 
thirds  of  the  Presbyteries  should  vote  for  revision,  the  next 
General  Assembly  must  appoint  a Committee  on  Pevision, 
and  another  Assembly  will  either  adopt  or  reject  or  revise  the 
report  of  this  committee,  and  send  it  down  to  the  Presby- 
teries for  final  action.  Several  years,  therefore,  must  elapse 
before  the  question  can  be  finally  settled,  in  case  the  General 
Assembly  should  resolve  upon  revision. 

An  infiuential  Presbytery  in  the  East,  which  includes  the 
Theological  Faculty  of  Princeton,  has  already,  rather  prema- 
turely, voted  against  revision.  Three  professors  of  as  many 
theological  seminaries  have  publicly  committed  themselves  in 
the  same  direction,  though  from  different  motives.^ 

^ Since  the  above  was  first  published  (October,  1889)  a marked  change  has  taken 
place.  The  action  of  the  Presbytery  of  New  Brunswick,  alluded  to,  was  reconsidered 
and  opposed  by  a large  minority,  headed  by  Dr.  McCosh,  the  venerable  ex-Presi- 
dent  of  Princeton  College  ; and  of  the  three  theological  professors,  one  (Dr.  Briggs)  has 
changed  his  opinion  and  now  favors  both  a revision  and  a new  creed.  But  what  is 
more  significant  is  the  fact  that,  within  the  last  few  weeks  (November  and  Decem- 
ber) several  of  the  largest  and  most  influential  Presbyteries,  as  those  of  New  York, 


12  CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

The  Western  Presbyteries  are  more  orthodox  than  those  of 
the  East,  as  America  is  more  orthodox  than  Europe.  This 
seems  to  be  a contradiction  to  the  westward  course  of  empire 
and  liberty,  but  the  progress  of  liberty  requires  a constraining 
conservative  force.  If  the  ultra-conservatives  and  the  radicals 
combine  against  revision  they  will  kill  it,  or  retard  it,  as  they 
killed  the  formulation  of  the  pan-Presbyterian  consensus  at 
Belfast. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  many  articles  from  ministers  and 
elders  in  several  papers  and  sections  of  the  country  are  strongly 
advocating  revision.  The  discussion  will  go  on  during  the  au- 
tumn and  winter,  and  culminate  at  the  next  General  Assembly. 
No  harm  can  come  out  of  the  discussion  if  it  be  carried  on  in  a 
Christian  spirit,  as  has  been  the  case  so  far.  We  have  ob- 
served no  signs  as  yet  of  the  odium  tJieologicum  and  the  rabies 
tJieologoruin^  from  which  Melanchthon  suffered  so  much  and 
prayed  to  be  delivered. 

Herision  in  England  and  Scotland. 

The  revision  movement  is  not  confined  to  America  ; it  per- 
vades the  whole  Presbyterian  family.  This  is  evident  from 
the  simultaneous  and  independent  actions  of  the  Presbyterian 
churches  of  Scotland  and  England  taken  last  spring.  They  are 
all  moving  in  the  same  direction,  though  on  different  lines. 
They  are  all  demanding  greater  liberty  and  an  adjustment  of 
the  Confession  to  their  personal  convictions  and  the  present 
state  of  theology. 

The  Established  Church  of  Scotland  has,  at  her  last  General 
Assembly,  met  the  difficulty  by  broadening  the  terms  of  sub- 
scription, and  leaving  it  to  the  conscience  of  each  minister  to 
decide  for  himself  what  he  regards  as  essential  and  necessary 
articles  of  faith.  She  could  not  alter  the  Confession  without 
an  act  of  Parliament,  owing  to  her  alliance  with  the  State. 

The  Free  Church  of  Scotland  has,  by  a large  majority,  re- 

Brooklyn,  Boston,  Baltimore,  Cincinnati,  etc.,  have  voted  in  favor  of  revision  with 
overwhelming  majorities,  which  took  both  parties  by  surprise. 


GROUNDS  OF  DISSATISFACTION. 


13 


solved  upon  a revision  of  the  Confession,  and  appointed  a com- 
mission for  the  purpose,  which  is  at  work  now. 

The  United  Presbyterian  Church  of  Scotland  had  already, 
in  1879,  taken  definite  action  by  the  adoption  of  a Declaratory 
Statement,  which  embodies  a modification  of  the  Confession 
chiefiy  in  three  points — namely,  the  doctrine  of  redemption,  so 
as  to  make  it  general  in  intent;  the  doctrine  of  divine  sover- 
eignty, so  as  not  to  exclude  human  responsibility  for  accepting  or 
rejecting  the  gospel ; and  a distinct  disapproval  ‘*of  all  compul- 
sory or  persecuting  and  intolerant  principles  in  religion,”  which 
are  taught,  or  supposed  to  be  taught,  in  the  Westminster  stand- 
ards. The  last  point  is  in  accordance  with  the  views  of  Ameri- 
can Presbyterianism  as  incorporated  in  the  American  recension 
of  the  Confession.  The  other  two  points  express  views  which 
have  come  to  prevail  in  modern  theology,  and  will  claim  the 
chief  attention  of  a Revision  Committee,  if  one  should  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  next  General  Assembly. 

The  Presbyterian  Church  of  England  has  chosen  the  most 
radical  solution  of  the  problem  by  making  a new  Confession  of 
Faith,  which  is  an  able  and  judicious  popular  abridgment  of 
the  Westminster  Confession,  wfithout  its  hard  and  objectionable 
features,  and  is  pervaded  by  a more  evangelical  and  devotional 
tone.  It  will  probably  be  adopted  by  the  next  Synod  in  1890. 

Grounds  of  Dissatisfaction. 

These  facts  prove  that  the  desire  for  some  change  is  deep, 
general,  and  irresistible  ; while  throughout  the  Anglo-American 
branches  of  the  Presbyterian  family  there  is  a considerable  dif- 
ference of  opinion  as  to  the  manner  and  extent  of  revision. 
A growing  number  of  ministers,  elders,  and  students  are  calling 
for  relief  from  bondage  to  certain  doctrines  which  the  theology 
of  the  age  has  outgrown,  which  are  no  more  taught  in  the  pul- 
pit and  would  not  be  tolerated  in  the  pews.  Some  theologians 
still  defend  them,  but  few  students  believe  them.  I know  of 
no  Presbyterian  minister  in  these  United  States  who  preaches 
the  decree  of  reprobation  or  preterition,  the  irresponsibility  of 


14  CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


the  sinner  for  not  accepting  the  gospel,  the  limitation  of  the 
atonement  to  the  small  circle  of  the  elect,  and  the  eternal  dam- 
nation of  non-elect  infants  dying  in  infancy,  and  the  damnation 
of  the  non-Christian  world — heathen,  Jews,  and  Mohammedans 
— who  still  constitute  by  far  the  greatest  part  of  mankind. 
And  yet  these  doctrines  are  supposed  to  be  taught  expressly  or 
implicitly  by  the  Westminster  standards.  If  not,  then  let  us 
disown  them  publicly  and  officially  beyond  the  power  of  con- 
tradiction. 

What  cannot  he  j>reached  in  the  pulpit  ought  not  to  he  taught 
in  a Confession  of  Faith,  either  expressly  or  hy  fair  logical  in- 
ference. On  the  other  hand,  what  is  taught  in  the  Confession 
ought  to  he  preached  in  the  pulpit. 

The  great  and  most  serious  objection  to  the  Westminster 
Confession  is  the  overstatement  of  divine  sovereignty,  at  the 
expense,  if  not  to  the  exclusion,  of  human  responsibility,  and 
the  overstatement  of  the  doctrine  of  particular  or  partial  elec- 
tion, to  the  exclusion  of  the  general  love  of  God  to  all  his  creat- 
ures. The  last  is  nowhere  mentioned.  It  is  a Confession  for 
the  exclusive  benefit  of  the  elect.  To  this  small  inside  circle 
all  is  bright  and  hopeful;  but  outside  of  it  all  is  dark  as  mid- 
night. It  is  the  product  of  the  most  polemical  and  most  intol- 
erant age  of  Christendom.^ 

1 It  is  highly  significant,  although  almost  incredible,  that  the  clearest  and  strong- 
est modern  reproduction  of  Westminster  Calvinism  ends,  not  with  Heaven  (as  the 
Apostles’  and  Nicene  Creeds),  but  with  Hell,  and  devotes  only  three  pages  to  Heaven 
(Dr.  Shedd’s  Dogmatic  Theology^  1888,  vol.  ii.,  664-666)  and  eighty-seven  pages  to 
Hell  (ii.,  667-754)  ! In  opposition  to  the  unanimous  opinion  of  the  ancient  Fathers, 
and  modern  exegetes  and  Bible  Revisers,  the  learned  author  denies  all  distinction 
between  Hades  and  Gehenna,  and  thus  doubles  the  Scripture  passages  on  Hell ! 
But  it  is  equally  significant,  on  the  other  hand,  that,  in  happy  and  laudable  incon- 
sistency, the  same  distinguished  and  most  amiable  divine  narrows  the  vast  dimen- 
sions of  the  Augustinian  and  Calvinistic  Hell  into  “a  narrow  pit,”  and  would  not 
condemn  a single  Arminian  unless  God  had  condemned  him  by  an  immutable  decree. 
Thus  the  liberal  spirit  of  the  nineteenth  century  protests  against  the  intolerance  of 
the  seventeenth,  and  the  charity  of  the  Christian  heart  prevails  over  the  cold  logio 
of  the  intellect. 


LIBERAL  MEMBERS  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  ASSEMBLY.  15 


Liberal  Members  of  the  Westminster  Assembly. 

Blit  it  is  an  important  fact,  which  deserves  careful  consider- 
ation in  the  present  discussion,  that  there  was  no  unanimity  in 
the  Westminster  Assembly  on  these  hard  doctrines  or  “ knotty 
points  ’’  of  Calvinism.  This  is  evident  from  the  Minutes  of 
the  Assembly  published  by  Professor  Alexander  F.  Mitchell, 
of  St.  Andrew’s,  from  the  London  manuscript,  in  1874,  and 
from  the  private  writings  of  several  of  the  leading  Westminster 
Divines,  quoted  in  his  valuable  introduction. 

Dr.  Twisse,  the  Prolocutor  of  the  Assembly,  was  a pro- 
nounced advocate  of  supralapsarianism,  which  makes  God’s 
almighty  and  sovereign  will  the  effective  cause  of  Adam’s  fall 
for  the  purpose  of  revealing  both  his  terrible  justice  on  the  lost 
and  his  free  grace  on  the  redeemed.  The  majority  of  the  As- 
sembly were  infra-  or  sublapsarians,  who  put  the  fall  of  Adam 
under  a simply  permissive  decree,  but  sided  with  the  supralap- 
sarians  in  denying  the  universal  intention  and  offer  of  salvation, 
and  restricting  it  to  the  ring  of  the  elect.  A third  party  dis- 
sented from  both,  and  favored  a kind  of  conditional  universal- 
ism — that  is,  the  doctrine  of  an  abundant  'provision  for,  and 
sincere  offer  of  salvation  to  all  men  on  condition  of  faith. 

The  last  theory  was  taught  in  the  French  Reformed  School 
of  Saumur  by  La  Place,  Louis  Cappel,  and  Moses  Amyraut  at 
the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century.  These  divines  de- 
parted from  the  prevailing  scholastic  Calvinism  in  three  points  : 
verbal  inspiration,  particular  or  limited  redemption,  and  the 
imputation  of  Adam’s  sin.  Their  views  were  “ disapproved  ” 
(not  condemned)  by  the  Helvetic  Consensus  Formula,  the  latest 
and  narrowest  symbol  of  scholastic  Calvinism, ‘ but  they  tri- 
umphed afterward  in  all  the  Reformed  Churches  of  the  Conti- 
nent, and  will  triumph  in  America.  The  doctrine  of  God’s 
impartial  love  to  all  mankind  is  the  theme  of  Paul’s  Epistle  to 
the  Romans  (i.  16) : The  gospel  is  the  power  of  God  unto 

> On  the  Helvetic  Consensus  Formula  of  1675,  and  the  Saumur  controversy,  see 
Schaflf,  Creeds^  i.,  477-498. 


16  CKEED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

salvation  to  every  one  tliat  believetli,”  and  lie  concludes  liis  argu- 
ment on  the  mystery  of  predestination  (xi.  32)  with  the  decla- 
ration that  “ God  hath  shut  up  all  unto  disobedience  that  he 
might  have  mercy  upon  all.^'^  Herein  lies  the  key  for  the  solu- 
tion of  the  problem. 

Among  the  liberal  members  of  the  Westminster  Assembly 
who  may  be  termed  conditional  universalists,  were  Calamy, 
Seaman,  Arrowsmith,  and  Gataker. 

In  the  debate  on  redemption,  Calamy  remarked : 

“ I am  far  from  universal  redemption  in  the  Arminian  sense,  but  I hold 
with  our  divines  in  the  Synod  of  Dort  that  Christ  did  pay  a prize  for  all^  with 
absolute  intention  for  the  elect,  with  conditional  intention  for  the  reprobate  in 
case  they  believe  ; that  Jesus  Christ  did  not  only  die  sufficiently  for  all,  but 
God  did  intend,  in  giving  of  Christ,  and  Christ,  in  giving  himself,  did  intend, 
to  put  all  men  in  a state  of  salvation  in  case  they  do  obey.  . . . This  uni- 

versality of  redemption  does  neither  intrude  upon  either  doctrine  of  special 
election  or  special  grace.  . . . The  difference  is  not  in  the  offer,  but  in 

the  application.  For  the  word  world  (John  iii.  16)  signifies  the  whole  world. 
. . . In  the  point  of  election  I am  for  special  election,  and  as  to  the  repro- 

bate, they  do  wilfully  damn  themselves.'*  (Mitchell’s  Minutes,  pp.  152,  154, 
156,  etc.) 

In  a sermon  before  tlie  House  of  Commons,  Calamy  said: 

“It  is  most  certain  that  God  is  not  the  cause  of  man’s  damnation.  He 
found  us  sinners  in  Adam,  but  made  none  sinners.” 

Seaman  declared  in  the  Assembly  : 

“ All  men  in  the  first  Adam  were  made  liable  to  damnation,  so  all  are 
liable  to  salvation  in  the  second  Adam.  Every  man  was  damnabilis,  so  is  every 
man  salvabilis  ” (p.  154). 

Dr.  Arrowsmith,  who  was  a member  of  the  Committee  on 
the  Confession  and  on  the  Catechisms,  in  his  explanation  of 
Horn.  ix.  22,  23,  justly  presses  the  important  difference  between 
the  active  irporjroLiJbaa-ev  and  the  passive  (or  middle)  KarrjpTLcr- 
yeva — that  is,  Godliim^QM  prepared  \n?>  chosen  vessels  of  mercy 
for  glory,  but  the  vessels  of  wrath  were  fitted  hy  themselves 
(not  by  God)  for  destruction.  He  adds  : 

“ I call  this  a remarkable  difference,  because  where  it  is  once  rightly  ap- 
prehended and  truly  believed,  it  sufficeth  to  stop  the  mouth  of  one  of  those 


LIMITED  ELECTION  AND  REDEMPTION. 


17 


greatest  calumnies  and  odiums  which  are  usually  cast  upon  our  doctrine  of 
predestination — viz.,  that  God  made  sundry  creatures  on  purpose  to  damn 
them — a thing  which  the  rhetoric  of  our  adversaries  is  wont  to  blow  up  to  the 
highest  pitch  of  aggravation.”  {Chain  of  Principles^  1659,  quoted  by  Mitchell 
in  the  Introduction  to  the  Minutes^  p.  Ixi.) 


Limited  Election  and  Redemption. 

These  liberal  views  did  not  prevail.  The  Westminster  Con- 
fession is  a compromise  between  the  supralapsarian  minority 
and  the  infralapsarian  majority.  It  limits  redemption  to  the 
elect  (the  term  “ atonement  ” does  not  occur  in  the  Confession), 
and  plainly  excludes  the  doctrine  of  a universal  redemption  in 
ch.  iii.,  6 they  who  are  elected  are  redeemed  by  Christ  ”),  in 
ch.  viii.,  8 to  all  those  for  wliom  Christ  has  purchased  redemp- 
tion, he  doth  certainly  and  effectually  apply  and  communicate 
the  same  ”),  and  in  ch.  vii.,  3 promising  to  give  unto  all  those 
that  are  ordained  unto  life  his  Holy  Spirit  ”).  Some  Presby- 
terian divines  have  tried  to  harmonize  the  document  with  the 
doctrine  of  universal  atonement,  but  the  natural  meaning  and 
intent  of  the  language  excludes  the  non-elect. 


Non-elect  Infants. 

The  same  limitation  is  applied  to  infants.  For  the  term 
elect  infants,”  in  ch.  x.,  3,  plaiidy  implies,  in  the  Calvinistic 
system,  ‘^non-elect”  or  “ reprobate  infants.”  If  the  Confession 
meant  to  teach  the  salvation  of  all  infants  dying  in  infancy,  as 
held  by  Dr.  Hodge  and  nearly  all  the  Presbyterian  divines  in 
America,  it  would  have  either  said  all  infants,”  or  simply 
“ infants.”  To  explain  elecV^  to  mean  all^^  is  not  only  un- 
grammatical and  illogical,  but  fatal  to  the  whole  system  of  a 
limited  election,  and  would  make  it  universal.  If  elect  infants 
is  equivalent  to  all  infants^  then  elect  adults  be  equivalent 

to  all  adults} 

* The  latest  and  the  most  far-fetched  misinterpretation  of  ch.  x. , 3,  is  that  of  Dr. 
Patton,  in  his  address  before  the  meeting  of  the  New  York  Presbyterian  Social  Union, 
held  December  2,  1889,  as  pubhshed  in  the  “New  York  Independent,”  December  5, 


O 


18  CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

This  unnatural  interpretation  is  also  unhistorical  and  contra- 
dicts the  expressed  opinions  of  the  scholastic  Calvinists  who 
regarded  the  eternal  damnation  of  reprobate  infants  an  essen- 
tial part  of  tlie  manifestation  of  the  glorious  majesty  and  jus- 
tice (!)  of  God.  Zvvingli  was  the  only  one  among  the  Keformers 
who  boldly  broke  through  the  tradition  of  centuries  and  ven- 
tured to  express  the  belief  or  strong  hope  of  the  salvation  of 
all  infants  dying  in  infancy,  and  of  all  the  noble  heathen  who 
honestly  and  earnestly  strove  after  righteousness.  Luther 
doubted  whether  Zwingli  could  be  a Christian  at  all  with  such 
sentiments.  Melanchthon,  in  the  Augsburg  Confession,  con- 
demns the  doctrine  that  infants  can  be  saved  without  baptism. 
Calvin  did  not  shrink  from  what  he  himself  confesses  to  be  a 

terrible  ” or  ‘‘  awful  decree,”  that  the  fall  of  Adam,  inde- 
pendently of  any  remedy,  should  involve  the  eternal  death  of 
so  many  nations,  with  their  infant  offspring f and  he  can  only 
answer,  “ Such  was  the  will  of  God.”  ^ In  another  place  he 
says : “ It  is  quite  clear  that  infants  who  are  to  be  saved — as 
certainly  some  of  that  age  are  saved — must  before  be  regener- 
ated by  the  Lord.”  “ This  is  precisely  the  doctrine  of  the 
Westminster  Confession. 

The  Continental  Calvinists,  with  few  exceptions,  followed 
the  great  Geneva  Leformer  in  confining  salvation  to  elect  in- 
fants after  previous  regeneration,  whether  baptized  or  not, 
and  in  excluding  non-elect  infants,  whether  baptized  or  not. 
Wendelin  (1584-1652),  in  his  Theologia  Christiana^  proves  that 

baptism  does  not  change  infants  spiritually,”  and  says : “ I 
confess,  with  Ursinus  and  our  other  teachers,  that  not. all  who 

1889,  where  he  says:  “The  antithesis  is  not  between  elect  infants  and  non-elect 
infants,  but  between  elect  infants  that  die  in  infancy,  and  elect  infants  that  do  not 
die  in  infancy.”  Such  a class  is  nowhere  spoken  of  in  the  Confession. 

1 Institutes^  Bk.  III.,  ch.  xxiii.,  7 : “ Itcrum  qucero  (he  takes  the  fact  for  granted, 
and  asks  this  question  as  an  answer  to  the  objector),  Unde  factum  est  ut  tot  gentes^ 
nna  cumliheris  eoruminf antihus  <^terncemorti  involveret  lapsus  Adee  absque  reme- 
dio,  nisi  quia  Deo  itavisiim  est?  Hie  obmutescere  opportet  tarn  dicaces  alioqui  lin- 
guas.  Decretum  quidem  horribile^  fateor : inficiari  tamen  nemo  poterit  quin 
qyrcesciverit  Deus^  quern  exitum  esset  habiturus  homo^  antequam  ipsum  conderet^  et 
ideo  prcESciverit^  quia  decreto  suo  sic  or  dinar  at.'" 

2 Ibid..,  Bk.  rV.,  ch.  xvi.,  17:  Infantes  quiservandisint  {ut  certe  ex  ea  cetate  om- 
nino  aliqui  servantur]  antea  a Domino  regenerari  minime  obscurum  est" 


2SrON-ELECT  INFANTS. 


19 


are  baptized,  whether  adults  or  infants^  become  participants  of 
the  grace  of  Christ ; for  the  election  of  God  is  most  free : it  is 
therefore  a prerogative  of  the  elect  alone^  which  baptism  seals.” 
In  the  Synod  of  Dort  (1619)  the  Calvinists,  including  the  dele- 
gates of  the  Church  of  England,  asserted  in  various  shapes 
infant  reprobation  and  infant  damnation  against  the  Arminians 
who  at  first  admitted  a sort  of  negative  hell  for  some  infants 
{t]iQ  poena  damni^  as  distinct  from  the  poena  sensu^^  but  after- 
wards positively  maintained  the  salvation  of  all  infants  dying 
in  infancy.^ 

AYhat  else  can  we  expect  from  the  Westminster  divines,  the 
severest  among  the  Calvinists  ? They  are  on  record  for  the 
same  awful  opinion.  Dr.  William  Twisse,  the  Moderator,  ex- 
pressly includes  “ all  the  infants  of  Turks  and  Saracens,  dying 
in  original  sin,”  among  those  whom  God  “ torments  in  hell 
fire,”  though  he  confesses  that  he  cannot  ‘‘devise  a greater 
shew  and  appearance  of  cruelties  than  in  this.”  ^ 

On  this  point  there  is  no  essential  difference  between  Roman 
Catholic  and  the  older  Protestant  divines,  except  that  Calvinism 
substitutes  non-elect  or  reprohate  infants  for  unbaptized  infants, 
and  by  denying  the  necessity  of  water  baptism  for  salvation, 
leaves  room  for  an  indefinite  enlargement  of  the  number  of 


1 See  passages  from.  Wendelin,  Heidegger,  Musculus,  Alsted,  Pareus,  Chamier, 
and  the  Acts  of  the  Synod  of  Dort,  collected  by  the  late  Dr.  Ch.  P.  Krauth  in  his 
book  Infant  Baptism  and  Infant  Salvation  in  the  Calvinistic  System  (against  Dr. 
Charles  Hodge),  Philadelphia,  1874. 

2 See  this  and  similar  testimonies  of  Robert  Baylie,  Samuel  Rutherford,  Cornelius 
Burgess,  Stephen  Marshall,  and  other  Westminster  divines  asserting  infant  damna- 
tion, in  Dr.  Briggs’  Whither^  pp.  123-132.  The  early  New  England  Puritans  held  the 
same  revolting  view  down  to  the  middle  of  the  last  century.  The  Rev.  Michael  Wig- 
glesworth,  of  Malden,  Mass.,  a tutor  in  Harvard  College,  published  a popular  poem. 
The  Day  of  Doom  (1662,  6th  ed.,  1715),  in  which  God  on  the  Judgment  Day  reasons 
with  reprobate  infants  who  “from  the  womb  unto  the  tomb  were  straightway  car- 
ried,” about  the  justice  of  their  eternal  damnation,  and  in  consideration  of  their 
ignorance  of  Adam’s  sin,  assigns  to  them  “the  easiest  room  in  hell!  ” Catholic 
divines  are  not  less  merciful  than  Mr.  Wigglesworth.  St.  Augustin,  who  first  formu- 
lated this  horrible  dogma,  reduced  the  damnation  of  unbaptized  children  to  a negative 
state  of  privation  rather  than  positive  suffering,  as  his  Christian  heart  revolted  against 
his  theology.  And  Bellarmine,  the  standard  expounder  of  the  Roman  system,  locates 
the  unbaptized  children  in  the  border  region  of  hell,  called  the  limbus  infantum^ 
which  is  some  distance  away  from  the  burning  flames. 


20  CKEED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

saved  infants,  whether  baptized  or  not.  This  difference  marks 
a progress  in  the  right  direction.  Modern  Calvinists,  includ- 
ing Dr.  Hodge  and  Dr.  Shedd,  have  made  the  further  progress 
of  extending  election  to  all  children  dying  in  infancy  ; but  their 
view  is  irreconcilable  with  the  theology  and  terminology  of  the 
Confession,  and  this  departure  should  be  frankly  acknowledged. 


The  Decree  of  Dejprohation, 

According  to  the  Confession,  then,  Christ  is  not  the  Saviour 
of  the  world  or  of  mankind,  but  the  Saviour  of  the  elect  only. 
This  is  in  open  contradiction  to  several  of  the  clearest  declara- 
tions of  the  Bible,  such  as  1 John  ii.  2 : “ Christ  is  the  propi- 
tiation for  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours  only,  hut  also  for  (the  sins 
of)  the  whole  worlds 

As  to  the  fall  of  Adam,  the  Confession  (ch.  v.,  4)  puts  it 
(with  the  infralapsarians)  under  a 'permissive  decree,  but  ex- 
pressly adds  that  it  occurred  not  by  a hare  permission  ; ” and 
states  more  plainly  in  ch.  vi.,  1 (with  the  supralapsarians)  that 
God  not  only  “ permitted  ’’  the  sin  of  our  first  parents,  but 
jpurjposed  to  order  it  to  his  own  glory.”  Calvin  likewise  com- 
bines the  two  views  in  his  famous  sentence  : “ Adam  fell,  God 
having  so  ordained  it,  but  he  fell  by  his  own  guilt.”  ^ 

The  Confession,  moreover,  teaches,  together  with  a decree  of 
election,  also  a decree  of  reprobation,  or  an  eternal  foreordina- 
tion of  “some  men  and  angels  to  everlasting  death  ” (ch.  iii.,  3, 
“ for  their  sins  ” being  omitted),  and  declares  that  God  was 
pleased  ^Ho pass  hy  the  rest  of  mankind  [the  non-elect]  and  to 
ordain  them  to  dishonor  and  wrath  for  their  sin,  to  the  praise 
of  his  glorious  justice  ” (ch.  iii.,  7).  This  decree  of  reprobation 
and  preterition  must  include  all  Gentiles,  Jews,  and  Moham- 
medans, who  constitute  more  than  two-thirds  of  the  human 
race ; for  they  are  expressly  excluded  from  salvation  in  ch.  x.,  4. 


^ histitutes,  Bk.  III.,  ch.  xxiii.,  8 : “ Cadit  homo,  Dei  providentia  sic  ordinante, 
sed  suo  vitio  cadit.'"  Just  before  he  said  : “ The  first  man  fell  because  the  Lord  had 
determined  that  it  should  so  happen.  The  reason  of  this  determination  is  unknown 
to  us  (cur  censuerit,  nos  latet)," 


THE  OBJECTIONABLE  PASSAGES  IN  THE  CONFESSION.  21 


Sucli  a decree  is  truly  a decretum  horribile,  as  Calvin  himself 
called  it,  altliongli  he  reluctantly  accepted  it  as  true  {attamen 
veriim)  in  obedience  to  his  logic  and  a false  interpretation  of 
the  ninth  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  which  can  be 
properly  understood  only  in  connection  with  the  tenth  and 
eleventh  chapters,  and  the  theme  (i.  16). 


The  Ohjectionable  Passages  in  the  Confession. 

In  order  to  judge  intelligently  of  the  teaching  of  the  Con- 
fession, we  must  read  the  whole  third  chapter  and  all  other 
passages  which  bear  on  this  hard  topic.  We  print  the  objec- 
tionable words  and  phrases  in  italics.  It  is  a remarkable  fact 
that  these  are  in  part  borrowed  verbatim,  without  a word  of 
acknowledgment  or  explanation,  from  the  Irish  Articles  of 
1615,  which  are  attributed  to  Archbishop  Ussher,  and  form  the 
connecting  link  between  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  and  the 
Westminster  Confession.  Ussher  was  appointed  a member  of 
the  Assembly,  but  never  came  near  it.  The  agreement  in  the 
order  of  subjects,  the  headings  of  chapters,  in  doctrine  and  lan- 
guage, is  very  striking. 


CHAPTER  III. 

OF  god’s  eternal  decree. 

God  from  all  eternity  did  by  the  most  wise  and  holy  counsel  of  his  own 
will,  freely  and  unchangeably  ordain  whatsoever  comes  to  pass  ; yet  so  as 
thereby  neither  is  God  the  author  of  sin,  nor  is  violence  oifered  to  the  will  of 
the  creatures,  nor  is  the  liberty  or  contingency  of  second  causes  taken  away, 
but  rather  established.  ’ 

II.  Althougli  God  knows  whatsoever  may  or  can  come  to  pass  upon  all 
supposed  conditions,  yet  hath  he  not  decreed  anything  because  he  foresaw  it 
as  future,  or  as  that  which  would  come  to  pass,  upon  such  conditions. 

III.  By  the  decree  of  God,  for  the  manifestation  of  his  glory,  some  men 
and  angels  are  predestinated  unto  everlasting  life,  and  others  foreordained  to 
everlasting  death. 

J Almost  verbatim  from  the  Irish  Articles.  See  Schaif,  Creeds^  iii. , 528.  This 
first  paragraph  is  entirely  unobjectionable  and  would  be  sufficient,  but  the  second 
part  is  afterward  ignored  and  even  contradicted  by  the  Confession.  (Ch.  ix.  3. ) 


22  CREED  REVISION  AND  TDE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


IV.  These  angels  and  meUy  thus  predestinated  and  foreordained  are  partic- 
ularly and  unchangeaUy  designed ; and  their  nurnber  is  so  certain  and  definite 
that  it  cannot  he  either  increased  or  diminished^ 

V.  Those  of  mankind  that  are  predestinated  unto  life,  God,  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world  was  laid,  according  to  his  eternal  and  immutable  pur- 
pose, and  the  secret  counsel  and  good  pleasure  of  his  will,  hath  chosen  in 
Christ,  unto  everlasting  glory,  out  of  his  mere  free  grace  and  love,  without 
any  foresight  of  faith  or  good  works,  or  perseverance  in  either  of  them,  or  any 
other  thing  in  the  creature,  as  conditions  or  causes  moving  him  thereunto  ; 
and  all  to  the  praise  of  his  glorious  grace. 

VI.  As  God  hath  appointed  the  elect  unto  glory,  so  hath  he,  by  the  eternal 
and  most  free  purpose  of  his  will,  foreordained  all  the  means  thereunto. 
Wherefore  they  who  are  elected  being  fallen  in  Adam  are  redeemed  by  Chri.st, 
are  effectually  called  unto  faith  in  Christ  by  his  Spirit  working  in  due  season  ; 
are  justified,  adopted,  sanctified,  and  kept  by  his  power  through  faith  unto 
salvation.  Neither  are  any  other  redeemed  hy  Christy  effectually  called^  justified^ 
adopted,  sanctijied,  and  saved,  hut  the  elect  only. 

VII.  The  rest  of  mankind  God  was  pleased,  according  to  the  unsearchable 
counsel  of  his  own  will,  whereby  he  extendeth  or  withholdeth  mercy  as  he  pleaseth, 
for  the  glory  of  his  sovereign  power  over  his  creatures,  to  pass  by,  and  to  ordain 
them  to  dishonor  and  wrath  for  their  gin,  to  the  praise  of  his  glorious  justice.^ 

VIII.  The  doctrine  of  this  high  mystery  of  predestination  is  to  be  handled 
with  special  prudence  and  care,  that  men  attending  the  will  of  God  revealed 
in  his  word,  and  yielding  obedience  thereunto,  may,  from  the  certainty  of 
their  effectual  vocation,  be  assured  of  their  eternal  election.  So  shall  this 
doctrine  afford  matter  of  praise,  reverence,  and  admiration  of  God,  and  of  hu- 
mility, diligence,  and  abundant  consolation  to  all  that  sincerely  obey  the  Gos- 
pel. 


CHAPTER  V. 

IV.  The  almighty  power,  unsearchable  wisdom,  and  infinite  goodness  of 
God,  so  far  manifest  themselves  in  his  providence,  that  it  extendeth  itself  even 

1 Sections  III.  and IV.  are  thus  combined  in  the  Irish  Articles:  “By  the  same 
eternal  counsel  God  hath  predestinated  some  unto  life  and  reprobated  some  unto 
death  ; of  both  which  there  is  a certain  number,  known  only  to  God,  which  can 
neither  be  increased  nor  diminished.”  Schaff,  1.  c.,  hi.,  528. 

2 Irish  Articles,  Art.  14  : “It  seemed  good  to  his  heavenly  wisdom  to  choose  out 

a certain  number  toward  whom  he  would  extend  his  undeserved  mercy,  leaving  the 
rest  to  be  spectacles  of  his  justice,”  . . . Article  15:  “Such  as  are  not 

predestinated  to  salvation  shall  finally  be  condemned  for  their  sins.”  Article 
32:  “All  men  are  not  so  drawn  by  the  Father  that  they  may  come  to  the  Son. 
Neither  is  there  such  a sufficient  measure  of  grace  vouchsafed  unto  every  man  where- 
by he  is  enabled  to  come  unto  everlasting  life.”  Comp,  the  Lambeth  Articles,  VII., 
VIII.,  and  IX.,  which  were  composed  and  approved  in  1595  as  a Calvinistic  sup- 
plement to  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  but  afterward  discarded  by  the  Episcopal 
Church. 


THE  OBJECTIONABLE  PASSAGES  IN  THE  CONFESSION.  23 


to  the  first  fall,  and  all  other  sins  of  angels  and  men,  and  that  nothy  a hare 
permission^  hut  such  as  hath  joined  with  it  a most  wise  and  powerful  hounding^ 
and  otherwise  ordering  and  governing  of  them^  in  a 7nanifold  dispensation,  to  his 
own  holy  ends ; * yet  so,  as  the  sinfulness  thereof  proceedeth  only  from  the 
creature,  and  not  from  God,  who  being  most  holy  and  righteous,  neither  is, 
nor  can  be  the  author  or  approver  of  sin. 

VI.  As  for  those  wicked  and  ungodly  men  whom  God,  as  a righteous  judge, 
for  former  sins,  doth  blind  and  harden,  from  them  he  not  only  withholdeth 
his  grace,  whereby  they  might  have  been  enlightened  in  their  understandings 
and  wrought  upon  in  their  hearts,  but  sometimes  also  withdraweth  the  gifts 
which  they  had,  and  exposeth  them  to  such  objects  as  their  corruption  makes 
occasion  of  sin  ; and,  withal,  gives  them  over  to  their  own  lusts,  the  tempta- 
tions of  the  world,  and  the  power  of  Satan  ; whereby  it  comes  to  pass  that  they 
harden  themselves,  even  under  those  means  which  God  useth  for  the  soften- 
ing of  others.® 


CHAPTER  VI. 

I.  Our  first  parents,  being  seduced  by  the  subtlety  and  temptation  of  Satan, 
sinned  in  eating  the  forbidden  fruit.  This  their  sin  God  was  pleased,  accord- 
ing to  his  wise  and  holy  counsel,  to  permit,  hating  purposed  to  order  it  to  his 
own  glory. 

IV.  From  this  original  corruption,  whereby  we  are  utterly  indisposed,  dis- 
abled,  and  made  opposite  to  all  good  and  wholly  inclined  to  all  evil,  do  proceed 
all  actual  transgressions. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

HI.  Man,  by  his  fall  into  a state  of  sin,  hath  icholly  lost  all  ability  of  will  to 
any  spiritual  good  accompanying  salvation  ; so,  as  a natural  man,  being  alto- 
gether  averse  from  that  good,  and  dead  in  sin,  is  not  able,  by  his  own  strength 
to  convert  himself,  or  to  prepare  himself  thereunto. 

CHAPTER  X. 

I.  All  those  whom  God  hath  predestinated  unto  life,  and  those  only,  he  is 
pleased,  in  his  appointed  and  accepted  time  effectually  to  call,  by  his  Word 
and  Spirit,  out  of  that  state  of  sin  and  death,  in  which  they  are  by  nature,  to 
grace  and  salvation  by  Jesus  Christ  ; enlightening  their  minds,  spiritually  and 
savingly,  to  understand  the  things  of  God  ; taking  away  their  heart  of  stone 
and  giving  unto  them  a heart  of  flesh ; renewing  their  wills,  and  by  his  al- 
mighty power  determining  them  to  that  which  is  good,  and  effectually  drawing 

’ Irish  Articles  (28)  : “ God  is  not  the  author  of  sin  ; howbeit,  he  doth  not  only 
permit,  but  also  by  his  providence  govern  and  order  the  same,”  etc. 

2 This  section  is  true  in  a certain  sense,  but  unguarded  and  liable  to  misunder- 
standing and  unnecessary  in  a Confession.  It  ought  to  be  stricken  out. 


24r  CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


them  to  Jesus  Christ ; yet  so  as  they  come  most  freely,  being  made  willing  by 
his  grace. 

III,  Elect  infants,  dying  in  infancy,  are  regenerated  and  saved  by  Christ 
through  the  Sprit,  who  worketh  when,  and  where,  and  how  he  pleaseth.  So 
also  are  all  other  elect  persons,  who  are  incapable  of  being  outwardly  called  by 
the  ministry  of  the  Word. 

IV.  Others,  not  elected,  although  they  may  be  called  by  the  ministry  of 
the  Word,  and  may  have  some  common  operations  of  the  Spirit,  yet  they 
never  truly  come  to  Christ,  and  therefore  cannot  be  saved ; much  less  can 
men^  not  professing  the  Christian  religion^  he  saved  in  any  other  way  whatso- 
ever, he  they  never  so  diligent  to  frame  their  lives  according  to  the  light  of  nature 
and  the  law  of  that  religion  they  do  profess  ; and  to  assert  and  maintain  that  they 
may  is  very  perriicious,  and  to  he  detested. 


Criticism, 

In  a thorough  revision  of  tlie  Confesion,  if  such  a one  should 
be  undertaken,  all  the  sentences  which  we  have  underscored 
ought  to  be  either  stricken  out  or  modified,  and  supplemented 
by  clear  statements  of  the  sole  responsibility  of  the  sinner  for 
rejecting  the  Gospel,  and  of  the  general  love  of  God  to  all  man- 
kind, in  accordance  with  such  unmistakable  passages  as  : ‘‘  How 
often  would  I have  gathered  thy  children  together,  as  a hen 
gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye  would  not  ” 
(Matt,  xxiii.  37) ; God  so  loved  the  vjorld.,  that  he  gave  his 
only-begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  on  him  should  not 
perish,  but  have  eternal  life  ” (John  iii.  16) ; God  our  Saviour 
willeth  that  all  men  should  be  saved  and  come  to  the  knowl- 
edge of  the  truth  (1  Tim.  ii.  4) ; “ The  Lord  is  long-suffering 
to  you-ward,  not  wishing  that  any  should  perish,  but  that  all 
should  come  to  repentance  ” (2  Pet.  iii.  9) ; Jesus  Christ  is 
the  propitiation  for  our  sins ; and  not  for  ours  only,  but  also 
for  (the  sins  of)  the  whole  world  ” (1  John  ii.  2).* 

To  escape  the  irresistible  force  of  these  and  similar  passages 
high  Calvinists  (and  Luther  also,  in  his  tract  De  Servo  Arhitrio) 
have  resorted  to  the  distinction  between  the  revealed  will  of 

^ It  is  characteristic  that  these  passages  are  not  quoted  in  the  Confession,  while  the 
passages  about  God  hating  Esau,  and  hardening  Pharaoh’s  heart,  from  the  ninth  chap- 
ter of  Romans,  figure  prominently  among  the  proof-texts. 


CEITICISM. 


25 


God,  which  would  save  all  men,  and  the  secret  will  of  God, 
which  would  save  only  a few.  But  this  would  put  an  intoler- 
able contradiction  into  the  being  of  God,  and  charge  him — sit 
venia  verho  ! — with  falsehood  and  deceit.  This  is  logic  with  a 
vengeance ; and  it  is  irresistible  from  Augustinian  premises. 

Divine  sovereignty  and  election  by  free  grace  are  most  im- 
portant truths  and  cardinal  doctrines  of  the  Reformed  system 
of  theology,  which  should  never  be  surrendered  or  weakened. 
Even  the  supralapsarian  scheme  of  predestination  must  be  al- 
lowed as  a private  opinion,  but  it  ought  never  to  be  forced  upon 
the  whole  Church  as  an  article  of  faith  in  a public  Confession 
which  all  office-bearers  have  to  subscribe.  The  older  Reformed 
Confessions,  even  Calvin’s  own  Catechism,  keep  within  the 
limits  of  infralapsarianism,  and  either  ignore  or  expressly 
deny  the  decree  of  reprobation.  Their  teaching  on  the  subject 
is  summed  up  in  the  sentence  of  CEcolarnpadius,  the  Reformer 
of  Basel : Solus  nostra  ex  Deo^  perdltlo  nostra  ex  nolois^^ 

As  to  Divine  sovereignty,  no  theologian  with  any  proper 
conception  of  God  can  deny  it ; but  the  question  is  concerning 
the  extent  of  its  exercise.  Sovei’eignty  implies  the  power  of 
self-limitation,  and  this  is  necessary  to  leave  room  for  the  free 
action  of  the  creature.  Freedom  of  will  is  clearly  recognized 
in  ch.  iii.,  1,  but  just  as  clearly  denied  in  chs.  vi.,  2,  4,  and  ix.,  3, 
which  teach  the  slavery  and  total  inability  of  the  will  since 
Adam’s  fall.  Without  some  degree  of  freedom  there  can  be 
no  responsibility.  The  two  are  inseparable.  The  Confession 
expressly  admits  this  in  the  case  of  Adam,  but  denies  it  in  the 
case  of  his  posterity. 

As  to  predestination,  the  Scriptures  clearly  teach  the  com- 
fortable doctrine  of  an  eternal  and  unchane^eable  election  of  be- 
lievers  in  Christ  to  holiness  and  salvation,  but  they  nowliere 
teach  an  eternal  decree  of  reprobation.  The  latter  is  merely  an 
inference,  but  it  is  not  a necessary  inference  ; for  there  are  de- 
grees even  among  the  elect.  The  term  reprobate  ” (aSo/ct/^o?) 
is  always  used  as  a description  of  moral  character  (Rom.  i.  28  ; 2 
Cor.  xiii.  5-7),  but  not  as  the  counterpart  of  the  elect.  The 
terms  reprobation  and  preterition  do  not  occur  at  all.  The  pas- 


2G  CIIEED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


sages  quoted  for  it  prove  nothing  to  the  point.  God  hardened 
Pharaoh’s  heart,  because  Pliaraoli  himself  had  previously  hard- 
ened his  heart.  God  punishes  sin  hy  sin.  God  did  not  pre- 
pare the  vessels  of  wrath  for  destruction,  but  they  prepared 
themselves  for  it.  We  have  already  pointed  to  the  important 
difference  between  the  passive  or  middle,  and  the  active  in 
Pom.  ix.  22,  23.'  What  is  said  in  the  same  chapter  about  God 
loving  Jacob  and  hating  Esau  (verse  13),  refers  to  their  repre- 
sentative place  in  the  history  of  Israel,  but  not  to  their  eternal 
destination.  God  “hated  ” Esau,  must  be  understood  in  the 
Hebraistic  sense  of  loving  less,  or  postponing ; as  in  some 
other  passages,  notably  in  the  words  of  Christ,  Luke  xiv.  26, 
who  claims  supreme  love  and  devotion  from  his  followers,  but 
does  not  expect  them  literally  “ to  hate  father  and  mother,” 
that  is,  to  break  one  of  the  chief  commandments  which  by  pre- 
cept and  example  he  taught  us  to  fulfil.  Esau,  though  more 
frank  and  generous  than  his  brother,  was  unfitted  for  the  po- 
sition in  the  theocracy,  and  so  far  rejected,  but  he  received  a 
blessing  from  his  father  (Gen.  xxvii.  39,  40),  and  notwithstand- 
ing his  inferior  position  on  earth  maj^  be  among  the  saved  in 
heaven  as  well  as  Adam.' 

Peprobation  and  damnation  are  not  antecedent  causes,  but 
judicial  acts  for  sins  already  committed.  A decree  of  reproba- 
tion, antecedent  and  independent  of  all  foreseen  moral  conduct, 
is  a logical  fiction,  and  contradicts  the  genius  of  Christianity 
and  the  plainest  declarations  of  the  Bible.  It  is  a recognized 
exegetical  canon  that  the  obscure  passages  must  be  explained 
in  the  light  of  the  clear  passages,  and  not  vice  verscc. 

I fully  admit  that  supralapsarianism  is  more  logical  than 
infralapsarianism.  I believe  that  St.  Augustin  and  all  the 
Peformers  who  followed  him  in  this  dogma,  felt  as  thinkers  the 
superior  force  of  the  former  system,  and  were  only  restrained  by 


1 See  the  quotation  from  Dr.  Arrowsmith,  p.  16. 

2 According  to  the  unanimous  opinion  of  the  Christian  fathers,  based  upon  the 
Book  of  Wisdom  x.  2,  Adam  and  Eve  were  the  first  among  the  saved,  as  they  were 
the  first  among  sinners.  Dante  assigns  them  a high  place  in  Paradise,  near  the  Holy 
Virgin.  {Paradiso,  canto  xxvi.,  82-85,  and  xxxii.,  5,  6.) 


CRITICISM. 


27 


moral  considerations  from  fully  adopting  it.^  It  is  impossible, 
with  any  proper  conception  of  Divine  omniscience  and  omnipo- 
tence, to  reduce  the  fall  of  man  to  a mere  accident  and  to  ex- 
clude it  from  the  will  and  purpose  of  God.  But  what  is  logical  is 
not  necessarily  theological.  God’s  truth  is  above  logic,  as  it  is 
above  reason,  and  cannot  be  compressed  within  the  narrow  lim- 
its of  syllogisms.  If  we  follow  the  rules  of  logic,  we  must  go 
much  further  than  the  snpralapsarians  themselves  are  willing  to 
go ; we  must  make  God  the  author  of  sin — which  they  illogi- 
cally  deny — and  must  land  at  last  in  pantheism,  which  ob- 
literates all  distinction  between  good  and  evil,  or  in  universal 
restoration,  which  assumes  that  the  elect  are  simply  the  first, 
and  the  non-elect  the  last  link  in  the  chain  of  the  saved.  This 
is  the  scheme  of  Schleiermacher,  the  greatest  theological  genius 
of  the  nineteenth  century.  By  an  ingenious  process  of  reason- 
ing, from  strictly  Calvinistic  premises,  he  arrives  at  the  conclu- 
sion that  there  is  an  absolute  decree  of  universal  salvation,  and 
that  particular  election  and  temporary  preterition  are  only  the 
necessary  intervening  stages  in  the  gradual  restoration  of  all 
mankind.  This  scheme  is  very  attractive  to  a philosophical 
mind,  is  apparently  favored  by  Paul  (Rom.  v. ; 1 Cor.  xv.),  and 
promises  the  most  satisfactory  solution  of  tlie  dark  problem  of 
sin  ; but  it  is  ruled  out  by  the  plain  declarations  of  our  Lord  on 
the  eternal  punishment  of  the  finally  impenitent  (Matt.  xii.  32 ; 
XXV.  46).  Beyond  his  authority  we  cannot  go. 

1 Luther  did  not  hesitate,  in  his  book  on  the  Slavery  of  the  Human  Will  (1525), 
to  go  so  far  as  to  resolve  all  the  exhortations  of  the  Scriptures  into  divine  irony  : 
“ Only  try  to  repent,  and  you  -will  soon  find  out  that  you  cannot  do  it.”  But  the 
Lutheran  Church  did  not  follow  her  leader  more  than  half-way.  Melanchthon  at  first 
(1522)  traced  even  the  adultery  of  David  and  the  treason  of  Judas  to  divine  agency, 
but  he  afterward  abandoned  what  he  called  a figment  of  Stoic  fatalism.  Zwingli, 
in  his  tract  Be  Brovidentia  (originally  a sermon  preached  at  Marburg,  in  1529,  before 
Philip  of  Hesse  and  the  Lutheran  Reformers,  who  did  not  object)  boldly  teaches  that 
God  is  the  author  of  the  fall  of  Adam  as  a means  to  an  end,  yet  without  guilt,  since 
he  is  not  under  law  ; but  he  moderated  his  supralapsarianism  by  extending  saving 
grace  to  all  infants  and  a large  part  of  the  heathen  world.  Calvin  ably  reasons  in 
the  third  book,  ch.  23d,  of  his  Institutes,  that  God  cannot  permit  what  he  does  not 
determine  and  ordain.  He  and  Beza  are  strongly  inclined  to  supralapsarianism, 
although  they  insist  always  on  the  guilt  of  man  for  what  he  cannot  help.  Their  sys- 
tem involves  the  contradiction  of  demanding  repentance  from  all  men,  and  yet  mak- 
ing repentance  impossible  for  the  non-elect. 


28  CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

The  Aiigustiiiian  and  Calvinistic  system  looks  only  at 
the  dark  side  of  the  problem,  and  needs  to  be  supplemented 
and  corrected.  It  is  true  that  all  men  by  Divine  foreknowledge 
and  foreordination  are  born  into  an  economy  of  sin  and  death  ; 
but  it  is  equally  true  that  by  the  same  divine  foreknowledge 
and  foreordination  all  men  are  born  into  an  economy  of  grace  and 
life.  Immediately  after  the  fall  of  our  first  parents  they  re- 
ceived the  promise  that  the  seed  of  the  woman  would  crush  the 
serpent’s  head  and  destroy  the  consequences  of  the  fall.  As 
soon  as  we  come  into  this  world,  we  are  brought  into  contact 
with  the  saving  influence  of  this  protevangelium,  so  gloriously 
fulfilled  in  the  person  and  work  of  Christ.  “ Where  sin 
abounded,  grace  did  abound  more  exceedingly  : that,  as  sin 
reigned  in  death,  even  so  might  grace  reign  through  righteous- 
ness unto  eternal  life  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  ” (Rom.  v. 
20,  21). 

And  this  gospel  is  sincerely  intended  and  offered  to  all.  As 
to  the  heathen,  there  is  nothing  in  the  Scriptures  to  forbid  and 
much  to  encourage  the  charitable  belief  and  hope  that  all  those 
are  saved  who  die  in  a state  of  preparedness  for  the  acceptance 
of  the  gospel  if  it  were  offered  to  them.  The  examples  of  such 
holy  outsiders  as  Melchisedek  and  Job,  in  the  Old  Testament, 
and  of  the  captain  of  Capernaum  and  Cornelius,  in  the  Kew, 
and  the  parable  of  the  judgment  of  the  Gfen tiles,  who,  without 
knowing  Christ  historically,  yet  do  the  works  of  Christ,  Matt. 
XXV.  44,  45,  are  most  significant  and  full  of  comfort.  The  case 
of  infants  dying  in  infancy  is  still  clearer.  From  God  they 
came,  to  God  they  return  if  he  calls  them  home.  We  have 
the  express  assurance  of  the  highest  authority,  our  Loi’d  and 
Saviour,  who  called  little  children  to  his  arms,  blessed  them, 
and  said,  without  any  reference  to  baptism  and  before  it  was 
instituted  : “ Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.”  In  view  of 
this  declaration  what  right  has  St.  Augustin  to  exclude  from 
that  kingdom  all  unbaptized  children,  and  what  right  has 
John  Calvin  to  exclude  non  elect  children,  or  to  assume  that 
there  are  any  non-elect  children  ? Is  it  rational,  is  it  Christian 
to  conceive  even  the  possibility  that  an  infinitely  good  and  mer- 


CRITICISM. 


29 


cifnl  God  should  create,  in  his  own  image,  countless  millions  of 
human  beings  to  huiTj  them  from  the  cradle  to  the  tomb,  and 
from  the  tomb  to  eternal  perdition,  before  they  have  committed 
any  actual  sin  ? Is  such  a God  not  a monstrous  caricature  of 
the  God  of  the  Bible,  who  is  a God  of  love  ? I know  that  those 
great  and  good  men  appeal  to  some  Scripture  passages,  and 
humbly,  though  reluctantly  and  against  their  better  feelings, 
submit  to  them  ; but  those  passages  are  of  doubtful  interpreta- 
tion, and  exegesis  has  made  considerable  progress  since  their 
days. 

The  extent  of  redemption,  as  far  as  God  is  concerned,  is  as 
unlimited  as  the  extent  of  the  fall.  And  this  is  nowhere 
more  clearly  stated  than  in  the  epistles  of  that  very  apostle  who 
has  been  so  much  misunderstood  and  abused  by  limited  redemp- 
tionists.  Paul’s  parallel  between  Adam  and  Christ,  as  the  rep- 
resentative heads  of  the  wdiole  human  race,  in  the  state  of  sin 
and  the  state  of  redemption,  is  a complete  refutation  of  the 
scheme  of  limited  election  and  exclusion.’ 

lie  will  be  the  master  theologian  of  the  future  who  will  be 
able  to  combine  in  one  coherent  system  the  awful  truth  of  uni- 
versal sinfulness  and  the  blessed  truth  of  universal  redemption, 
and  reconcile  the  apparent  antagonism  of  divine  sovereignty 
and  human  responsibility,  of  the  free  salvation  of  the  elect  and 
the  merited  condemnation  of  the  finally  impenitent. 

In  the  meantime  I would  rather  stand  the  reproach  of  being 
illogical  than  deny  one  or  the  other  of  two  great  truths  which 
God  has  clearly  revealed  in  his  word,  and  which  enter  into  our 
inmost  Christian  experience. 

1 Comp.  Rom.  i.  16,  17  ; v.  12-21  ; xi.  32  ; 1 Cor.  xv.  22  ; Gal.  iii.  22.  The  im- 
portant parallel  between  the  first  and  second  Adam  in  Rom.  v.  12  sqq.  should  be  read 
in  the  Revised  Version  ; for  King  James’  Version,  by  neglecting  the  definite  article 
before  “ many  ” (oi  ttoK\oi=  ndvre^)  creates  a false  and  misleading  distinction  between 
many  sind  few ^ or  many  and  all,  instead  of  Paul’s  distinction  between  all  and  one,  or 
the  whole  race  and  the  one  representative.  Comp.  ver.  18. 


30  CREED  REVISION  AND  TKE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


The  Mystery  of  Predestination. 

The  doctrine  of  predestination,  as  the  Confession  truly  says 
(ch.  iii.,  8),  is  a high  mystery,”  and  should  be  handled  with 
special  prudence  and  care.”  But  the  Confession  fails  just  in 
presuming  to  know  and  to  teach  too  much  about  this  transcen- 
dent mystery,  and  in  handling  it  as  if  it  were  a mathematical 
problem.  It  gives  it  a disproportionate  importance  and  devotes 
much  more  space  to  it  than  to  the  Holy  Trinity  and  other  vital 
doctrines. 

The  very  terms j^r^destination  and  /br^’ordination  involve  a 
metaphysical  impossibility  ; for  in  God  there  is  neither  before 
nor  after  ; neither  forethought  nor  afterthought ; nor  can  we 
lix  any  point  in  eternity  when  he  formed  a resolution  and  passed 
a decree.  The  Calvinists  assert  that  foreordination  precedes 
foreknowledge  ; the  Arminians  reverse  the  order;  both  forget 
that  all  is  simultaneous  and  eternal  before  God.  We  reason 
from  our  human  stand-point,  and  ought,  therefore,  to  be  cau- 
tious and  modest. 

We  have  to  stop  somewhere  in  the  flight  of  speculation,  and 
must  admit  the  boundaries  of  our  knowledge.  There  is  a 
moral  as  well  as  an  intellectual  logic — a logic  of  the  heart  as 
well  as  of  the  head.  Our  conscience  forbids  us  to  bring  a God 
of  infinite  purity  and  holiness  into  any  contact  with  sin,  direct  or 
indirect,  except  that  he  punishes  and  overrules  it  for  good  by 
his  infinite  wisdom  and  goodness.  Speculation  would  drive 
us,  with  irresistible  force,  from  absolute  sovereignty  to  fatalism, 
from  infralapsarianism  to  supralapsarianism,  from  supralapsa- 
rianism  to  pantheism  or  universalism  ; but  theoretic  speculation 
is  checked  by  the  Bible,  by  the  Cliristian  consciousness,  and  by 
practical  experience.  Christian  humility  claims  no  merit  what- 
ever, and  gives  all  the  glory  of  our  salvation  to  God  alone,  but 
those  who  are  lost  are  exclusively  lost  by  their  own  guilt. 

This  is  the  ground  on  which  every  Calvinist  practically 
stands  as  a preacher  and  worker,  whatever  be  his  theory  as  a 
theologian.  He  preaches  and  works  as  if  all  depended  on  man, 


THE  CONEESSION  AND  BIBLICAL  CEITICISM.  , 


31 


and  he  prajs  as  if  all  depended  on  God.  lie  addresses  his 
hearers  as  responsible  beings  to  whom  the  Gospel  salvation  is 
sincerely  offered,  without  exception,  on  the  terms  of  repentance 
and  faith.  If  this  is  an  illogical  inconsistency,  then  it  is  at  least 
a necessary,  happy,  and  useful  inconsistency,  and  is  supported 
by  the  authority  of  the  great  Apostle  of  faith,  who  exhorts  ns  : 
‘AYork  out  your  own  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling;  for  it 
is  God  who  worketh  in  you  both  to  will  and  to  work,  for  his 
good  pleasure  ” (Phil.  ii.  13). 

The  Confession  and  Biblical  Criticism. 

Other  questions  now  agitating  the  Presbyterian  Church  need 
not  trouble  the  Assembly  at  present,  nor  are  they  necessarily 
connected  with  the  proposed  revision,  but  may  be  briefly  men- 
tioned in  this  connection. 

There  is  much  popular  discontent  with  higher  criticism,  so 
called.  But  criticism  is  neither  demanded  nor  forbidden  by  the 
Confession,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with  it  as  long  as  it  does  not 
deny  the  Divine  inspiration  and  authority  of  the  Scriptures  as 
the  supreme  rule  of  faith  and  practice.  The  Confession  as- 
sumes the  fact,  but  does  not  define  the  mode,  of  inspiration, 
and  leaves  this  to  scientific  theology.  Its  chapter  on  the  Bible 
(ch.  i.)  is  the  best  in  the  whole  book,  and  unsurpassed  by  any  con- 
fessional statement  of  the  same  subject.  The  Confession  bor- 
rows its  proof-texts  from  King  James’  Version,  but  it  nowhere 
declares  it  infallible  as  to  text  or  rendering,  and  the  proposal  of 
a revision  of  that  version  was  made  by  the  best  scholars  in  the 
Westminster  Assembly,  but  defeated  by  the  course  of  events, 
until  it  was  resumed  and  carried  out  at  last  in  our  generation 
by  the  co-operation  of  scholars  of  all  denominations  in  the  same 
Jerusalem  Chamber  where  the  Westminster  Confession  was 
framed. 

Biblical  criticism,  both  textual  and  literary  (miscalled  lower 
and  higher),  is  an  essential  and  important  branch  of  theologi- 
cal science  which  endeavors  to  solve  the  problems  of  the  text, 
origin,  history,  character,  and  value  of  the  several  books  which 


32  CKEED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


constitute  the  canon.  It  is  of  comparatively  recent  date,  and 
lias  been  cultivated  chiefly  in  Germany,  the  workshop  of  mod- 
ern theology  and  research,  with  more  or  less  co-operation  of 
Swiss,  Dutch,  French,  English,  and  American  scholars. 


Textual  Criticism. 

Textual  criticism  aims  to  restore  the  primitive  text  of  the 
sacred  writers  from  the  multitude  of  ancient  manuscripts,  ver- 
sions, and  patristic  quotations.  By  the  discovery  and  publica- 
tion of  the  oldest  manuscripts,  and  the  painstaking  labors  of 
Griesbach,  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Tregelles,  Westcott,  and 
Flort,  we  have  now  a much  older  and  purer  text  of  the  'New 
Testament  than  the  so-called  textus  receptus^  from  which  the 
authorized  Protestant  versions  were  derived.  The  Anglo- 
American  revision  of  1881  contains  over  five  thousand  textual 
improvements,  and  made  them  accessible  to  the  English 
reader.^ 

It  is  to  be  presumed  that  the  Revisers  of  the  proof-texts  of 
the  Confession  will  give  due  weight  to  the^  Revised  Yersion. 
It  would  be  a sore  blemish  (to  quote  only  one  instance),  if  the 
spurious  interpolation  of  the  three  witnesses  in  1 John  v.  7 
were  again  used  as  a proof-text  for  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Trinity  in  ch.  ii.,  3,  where  it  stands  first,  even  before  the  baptis- 
mal formula.  The  restoration  of  the  distinction  between  Hades 
(the  spirit- world)  and  Gehenna  (the  place  and  state  of  torment), 
in  the  Revised  Version,  will  also  require  a sifting  of  proof -texts, 
and  Job  xix.  26,  27,  which  teaches  the  immortality  of  the  Soul, 
should  not  be  quoted  in  proof  for  the  resurrection  of  the  body, 
as  it  is  in  ch.  xxxii.,  2. 

The  material  for  the  restoration  of  the  best  Hebrew  text  is 
not  yet  sufficiently  collected  and  edited  ; but  the  process  has  be- 
gun, and  will  be  prosecuted  with  increasing  zeal  by  the  few  schol- 
ars who  are  equipped  for  the  difficult  task. 

* A list  of  the  principal  textual  changes  may  be  found  in  SchafF’s  Companion  to 
the  Greek  Text  and  the  English  Version^  pp.  438  sqq.  (third  ed.,  N.  Y.,  1888). 


LITEKAKY  CKITICISM. 


33 


Literary  Criticisra. 

Literary  or  liiglier  criticism  deals  with  the  questions  of  au- 
thorship, time,  and  place  of  composition,  the  object  and  aim  of 
the  writer,  and  all  the  historical  antecedents  and  surroundings 
of  the  books  of  the  Bible.  Tliese  are  all  legitimate  and  impor- 
tant questions.  As  Protestants  we  have  a right  and  duty  to  ex- 
amine and  revise  the  historical  evidence  on  which  the  tra- 
ditional views  rest.  Some  of  these  questions  are  exceedingly 
difficult,  such  as  the  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch,  of  Deutero- 
Isaiah,  of  Daniel,  of  the  Apocalypse,  the  Synoptic  problem, 
and  the  Johannean  problem.  They  have  called  forth  a wil- 
derness of  experiments,  conjectures,  and  hypotheses. 

Criticism  is  not  yet  out  of  the  woods  ; but  some  things  are 
settled,  others  will  bo  settled,  and  still  others  can  never  be  set- 
tled with  any  degree  of  certainty.  The  labors  of  patient  and 
well-conducted  criticism  will  lead  step  by  step  to  a clearer  and 
fuller  knowledge  of  the  human  history  of  the  Bible,  and 
strengthen  rather  than  weaken  the  foundation  of  its  Di\u’ne 
origin  and  authority.  The  Bible  can  stand  any  amount  of  in- 
vestigation. This  century  has  produced  a multitude  of  Lives  of 
Christ,  and  the  result  is  that  the  humanity  of  our  Lord  has  been 
brought  nearer  to  the  head  and  heart  of  Christendom  ; while 
his  Divinit}^,  full  of  grace  and  truth,  shines  all  the  brighter 
through  the  veil  of  his  flesh. 


The  Anti-jpqpery  Clauses  of  the  Confession. 

Pinally,  we  venture  to  raise  an  objection  which  has  not  bee'n 
touched  at  all  in  this  discussion,  as  far  as  I have  seen,  and  is 
probably  not  contemplated  by  the  General  Assembly,  but  which 
I feel  very  strongly,  both  on  moral  as  well  as  exegetical  and 
historical  grounds.  I will  mention  it  at  the  risk  of  provoking 
the  opposition  of  many  Presbyterian  friends  whom  I highly 
esteem.^  It  is  the  declaration  of  the  Confession  that  the  Pope 

’ In  this  I was  happily  mistaken.  Quite  a number  of  influential  voices  have  since 
^ responded  to  my  protest  and  advocated  an  elimination  of  the  unfortunate  attacks  of 


34  CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

of  Home  is  the  Antichrist,*  and  that  Papists,  that  is,  all  Homan 
Catholics,  are  idolaters.* 

I protest  against  this  judgment  as  untrue,  unjust,  unwise, 
uncharitable,  and  unsuitable  in  any  Confession  of  Faith.  It  is 
a colossal  slander  on  the  oldest  and  largest  Church  of  Christen- 
dom. It  is  the  passionate  outburst  of  an  intensely  polemical 
age,  but  absolutely  unjustifiable  now.  It  can  only  do  harm  and 
no  possible  good.  Instead  of  converting  Homanists,  it  must 
repel  them  and  intensify  and  perpetuate  their  prejudices  against 
Protestantism.  It  will  become  more  and  more  o-bnoxious  and 
hurtful  as  the  Homan  Catholic  Church  grows  in  numbers  and 
infiuence  in  our  country. 

The  Pope  of  Home  is  the  legitimate  head  of  the  Homan 
Church,  and  as  such  he  has  the  same  rights  and  privileges  as 
the  Eastern  Patriarchs  or  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  and 
York  have  over  their  respective  dioceses.  He  is  older  than 
any  one  of  them,  and  his  line  goes  back  in  unbroken  succession 
to  Clement  of  Home  at  the  end  of  the  first  century.  There 
were  not  a few  wicked  popes,  and  many  bad  bishops,  as  there 
were  wicked  high-priests  in  the  history  of  Israel ; the  first  con- 
nived at  the  worship  of  the  golden  calf,  and  the  last  demanded 
the  death  of  the  Messiah,  who  came  to  save  his  people.  Dante, 
who  was  a good  Catholic,  puts  five  popes  into  hell,  two  into 


the  Confession  upon  a venerable  and  powerful  Christian  Church.  Two  theological 
professors  also,  who  are  decided  anti -revisionists,  have  assured  me  privately  that  on 
this  point  they  heartily  agreed  with  me,  and  would  support  an  excision. 

1 Ch.  XXV.,  6 : “ The  Pope  of  Rome  ...  is  that  Antichrist,  that  man  of  sin 
and  son  of  perdition,  that  exalteth  himself,  in  the  Church,  against  Christ  and  all 
that  is  called  God.”  This  section  was  likewise  anticipated  by  the  Irish  Articles, 
Art.  80.  See  Schaff,  Creeds^  iii.,  540. 

2 Ch.  xxiv.,  3,  forbids  marriage  ‘‘  with  infidels.  Papists^  and  of/icr idolaters.”  This 
sentence  should  read  : “ With  infidels  and  idolaters.”  There  is  not  a Roman  Cath- 
olic who  would  not  indignantly  reject  the  charge  of  idolatry  as  a calumny.  The  Ro- 
man divines  distinguish  between  different  degrees  of  worship  (latria^  doulia^  and 
hyper-doulia)^  and  claim  the  highest  degree  for  God  alone,  as  the  giver  of  every  good 
gift.  We  must  re.spect  their  honest  convictions  and  judge  them  by  their  doctrinal 
standards,  however  much  we,  from  our  Protestant  stand-point,  may  oppose  Mari- 
olatry  and  hagiolatry,  as  a refined  form  of  semi-idolatry.  How  differently  did  Paul 
deal  with  the  Athenians,  who  were  real  idolaters.  He  gave  them  credit  for  being 
even  “ over-religious,”  or  “very  religious,”  in  their  anxiety  to  worship  all  gods— 
known  and  unknown.  Acts  xvii.  23. 


THE  ANTI-POPERY  CLAUSES  OF  THE  CONFESSION. 


35 


purgatory,  and  saw  none  in  heaven,  at  least  none  who  attracted 
his  attention.  We  go  further  and  admit  that  there  is  an  anti- 
Christian  element  in  jpajpacy  as  a system — namely,  the  claim 
of  the  pope  to  be  the  head  of  all  Christendom  and  the  vicar  of 
Christ  on  earth.  Even  Pope  Gregory  I.,  or  the  Great,  rebuked 
this  assumption  as  anti-Christian,”  and  preferred  to  be  called 
“ the  servant  of  the  servants  of  God,”  rather  than  oecumenical 
or  universal  bishop.  But  this  does  not  make  every  or  any 
pope  ‘^that  Antichrist,”  or  “that  man  of  sin,”  and  “that  son  of 
perdition  that  exalteth  himself  against  Christ  and  all  that  is 
called  God.”  The  alleged  proof-text  in  2 Thess.  ii.  3,  4,  refers 
to  “ the  mystery  of  lawlessness  ” (not  “ iniquity,”  as  the  Au- 
thorized Yersion  has  it),  which  was  “ at  work  already  ” (verse 
7)  in  the  time  of  Paul,  before  there  was  any  popery.  If  he 
had  had  popery  in  mind,  he  would  have  warned  against  it  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Pomans,  and  not  in  that  to  the  Thessalonians. 
“Lawlessness,”  moreover,  is  not  the  characteristic  mark  of 
popery,  which  is  just  the  reverse — namely,  tyranny.  As  to  the 
term  “ antichrist,”  it  only  occurs  in  the  Epistles  of  John  (1  John 
ii.  18,  22  ; iv.  3 ; 2 John  7),  and  is  used  not  of  a future  individ- 
ual, but  of  contemporaries  of  the  Apostle,  of  heretical  teachers 
in  Asia  Minor,  who  had  been  members  of  the  Church,  and  left 
it,  and  who  denied  the  incarnation  and  the  real  humanity  of 
Christ.  The  pope  has  never  done  this,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
has  ever  held  those  doctrines  with  the  utmost  tenacity,  and 
can  never  give  them  up. 

The  misinterpretation  of  these  anti-popery  pet  texts,  which 
has  long  since  been  exploded  among  scholars,  furnished  a pre- 
text for  the  repeated  attempts  made  in  the  General  Assembly  to 
unchurch  the  Church  of  Pome,  and  to  unbaptize  or  to 
heathenize  her  two  hundred  millions  of  members.  It  seems 
incredible  that  a body  of  intelligent  and  well-educated  Christian 
ministers,  as  the  majority  of  Presbyterians  undoubtedly  are, 
should  be  able  to  entertain  such  a monstrous  proposition.  It 
outpopes  the  Pope,  who  recognizes  Protestant  baptism,  and  it 
would  unchurch  all  the  churches  of  the  Peformation  which  re- 
ceived their  ordinances  from  the  mediaeval  Catholic  Church. 


36  CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

The  last  attempt  of  this  kind  was  made  in  the  General  Assem- 
bly of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  at  Cincinnati,  in  1885,  but  was 
fortunately  defeated  by  the  good  sense  of  the  majority.’  I 
thank  God  that,  as  a delegate,  I helped  to  oppose  and  defeat 
this  unreasonable  anti-popery  fanaticism.  The  action  of  the 
United  Assembly  of  1885  nullifies  the  contrary  action  of  the 
Old  School  Assembly,  likewise  held  in  Cincinnati  forty  years 
earlier  (1845),  which  declared  Pomish  baptism  invalid.  But 
this  decision  was  opposed,  with  irrefragable  arguments,  by  Dr. 
Charles  Hodge,  of  Princeton,  and  later,  in  1853  and  1854, 
when  the  same  question  came  up  in  the  Hew  School  General 
Assembly,  by  Dr.  Henry  B.  Smith,  of  Hew  York.  These  hon- 
ored divines,  now  in  their  graves,  did  by  this  protest  immense 
service  to  the  cause  of  truth  and  righteousness,  and  prepared 
the  way  for  the  rejection  of  the  anti-popery  clauses  of  the  Con- 
fession. 

It  is  high  time  that  we  should  abandon  the  policy  of  intol- 
erance, prejudice,  and  bigotry  against  our  Boman  Catholic  fel- 
low^-Christians,  and  adopt  the  policy  of  justice  and  charity 
which  will  lead  to  better  results.  I hope  that  the  day  may  not 
be  far  distant  when  American  Protestants  will  no  longer  envy 
and  oppose,  but  hail  with  joy  the  progress  of  the  Catholic,  as 
well  as  any  other  Christian  Church  which  preaches  the  gospel 
and  promotes  piety  and  virtue  among  the  people. 


Liberal  Terms  of  Subscription. 

The  views  I have  here  expressed  are  not  new.  I have  held 
and  taught  them  for  nearly  fifty  years.  But  how,  then,  could 
I ever  subscribe  to  the  Westminster  Confession  ? I may  as 
w^ell  answer  this  question.  I honestly  stated  my  objections  to 
the  Heidelberg  Catechism  (the  eightieth  question)  before  I 
signed  it,  after  my  call  from  the  University  of  Berlin  to  a pro- 

^ One  of  the  arguments  used  by  a clerical  delegate  and  Doctor  of  Divinity  in  that 
Assembly  against  the  validity  of  Romish  baptism  vs^as,  that  the  Pope  sometimes 
baptized  donkeys ; to  which  my  neighbor  good-humoredly  replied  in  a whisper : 
“ And  we  ordain  them.” 


LIBERAL  TERMS  OF  SUBSCRIPTION. 


37 


fessorsliip  in  tlie  German  Reformed  Clmrcli  of  the  United 
States  in  1844  ; and  I as  honestly  stated  my  objections  to  the 
Westminster  Confession  when  I was  called  (in  view  of  all  my 
previous  publications)  to  a professorship  in  the  Union  Theolog- 
ical Seminary  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  1869  ; and  on 
both  occasions  I was  assured  by  men  then  highest  in  authority 
(as  Drs.  John  W.  Uevin,  William  Adams,  Henry  B.  Smith, 
E.  F.  Hatfield,  and  others)  that  the  terms  of  subscription  were 
so  liberal  as  to  leave  ample  room  for  all  my  dissenting  views 
on  these  and  other  points. 

It  is  well  understood  that  ministers  and  elders  generally  are 
allowed,  according  to  the  “ Form  of  Government  ” (chs.  xiii., 
xiv.,  and  xv.),  liberty  of  dissent  in  all  those  articles  of  the  Con- 
fession which  are  not  necessary  or  essential  to  what  is  termed 
(somewhat  inaccurately)  ‘‘the  system  of  doctrine  taught  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures.”  ^ 

But  I confess  I do  not  altogether  like  this  mode  of  subscrip- 
tion. Would  it  not  be  wiser  and  safer  so  to  alter  and  abridge 
the  Confession  as  to  make  it  less  objectionable  and  more  gener- 
ally acceptable  ? Unless  some  change  takes  place,  it  will  be- 
come, I fear,  more  and  more  difficult  after  this  revision  ques- 
tion has  been  agitated,  to  secure  the  services  of  intelligent  and 
conscientious  elders  and  deacons.  This  has  been  made  very 
apparent  during  the  recent  discussions  in  meetings  of  Presby- 
teries and  in  public  papers.'* 

1 1 say  ‘‘inaccurately,”  for  the  Bible  is  much  more  and  much  less  than  a logically 
constructed  “system,”  and  much  higher,  deeper,  and  broader  than  the  Calvinistic 
or  any  other  human  system.  It  would  be  better  to  say  : “ the  teaching  of  the  Bible.” 
The  precise  formula  of  subscription  for  ministers,  elders,  and  deacons  is  this:  “Do 
you  sincerely  receive  and  adopt  the  Confession  of  Faith  of  this  Church,  as  contain- 
ing the  system  of  doctrine  taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  ? ” The  proof  text  quoted 
is  2 Tim.  i.,  13  : “ Hold  fast  the  form  of  sound  words,”  etc. 

2 A Presbyterian  elder  and  director  of  the  Princeton  Theological  Seminary  is 
quoted  as  having  said  during  the  last  Assembly  : “It  always  gives  me  a cold  chill 
when  I read  the  third  chapter  of  the  Confession  on  predestination ; it  ought  to  be 
changed.”  Such  is  the  judgment  of  the  most  intelligent  and  best-informed  laymen. 
They  would  not  listen  to  a sermon  on  the  decree  of  reprobation  or  preterition  of  the 
rest  of  mankind,  or  the  damnation  of  non-elect  infants  and  the  whole  non-Christian 
world.  In  the  Presbyterian  Church  the  elders  have  as  much  right  to  speak  and  to 
vote  as  the  ministers. 


38  CEEED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


Different  Modes  of  Relief  . 

Let  us  now  briefly  consider  the  different  inodes  of  relief. 

1.  The  easiest  mode  is  to  widen  the  terms  of  subscription 
and  to  reduce  it  to  a general  approval  of  the  Confession,  with  a 
distinct  reservation  of  dissent  from  some  of  its  doctrines.  This 
is  demoralizing,  and  would  virtually  neutralize  the  subscrip- 
tion. Letter  do  away  with  subscription  altogether.  The  terms 
are  already  liberal  enough. 

2.  The  second  mode  is  a supplement  or  declaratory  state- 
ment such  as  the  United  Presbyterian  Church  of  Scotland 
adopted  in  1879.  Put  this  amounts  to  two  Confessions  which 
flatly  contradict  each  other  in  several  important  articles.  It 
does  not  remove  the  stumbling-blocks,  and  gives  no  permanent 
relief. 

3.  A third  mode  is  a revision  of  the  Confession  itself  by 
omissions  and  modifications.  This  is  in  accordance  with  the 
tradition  of  the  American  Presbyterian  Church,  which  has  al- 
ready revised  four  articles  on  Church  and  State,  and  one  arti- 
cle on  remarriage,  and  has  appointed  a committee  for  the  re- 
vision of  the  proof-texts.  This  is  the  course  adopted  by  the 
Assembly  of  the  Free  Church  of  Scotland,  with  which  the 
American  Church  is  most  in  sympathy.  Pevision  can  be  made 
without  difficulty  by  the  simple  omission  of  the  hard  doctrine 
of  reprobation  and  preterition,  the  wholesale  condemnation  of 
the  heathen  world,  and  the  anti-popery  clauses.  If  we  can  re- 
move these  stumbling-blocks,  why  not  do  so  ? Is  it  not  our 
duty  to  do  so  ? If  we  can  make  our  system  clearer,  more  ac- 
ceptable, and  less  liable  to  misunderstanding  by  friend  or  foe, 
we  ought  not  to  hesitate  for  a moment.  It  will  be  a great  gain 
and  an  important  step  toward  a new,  shorter,  and  simpler  Con- 
fession, which  at  no  very  distant  time  will  express  the  living 
faith  of  the  Church  in  the  nineteenth  or  twentieth  century,  as 
the  Westminster  Confession  expressed  the  faith  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church  in  the  seventeenth  century. 

4.  The  most  radical  cure  would  be,  of  course,  a new  Con- 


I 


DIFFERENT  MODES  OF  RELIEF. 


39 


i fession.  The  English  Presbyterian  Chinch  has  taken  this  course, 
and  produced  a document  which  retains  all  that  is  good  in  the 
Westminster  Confession,  and  skilfully  avoids  all  the  objection- 
able points  which  we  have  mentioned,  omitting  also  the  anti- 
popery  clauses.  The  Congregational  Churches  of  England  and 
the  United  States,  which  formerly  accepted  the  Westminster 
system  of  doctrine,  have  likewise  made  new  statements  of  faith 
which  seem  to  give  reasonable  satisfaction.  Such  a work  re- 
: quires  much  learning,  wisdom,  and  a secondary  inspiration. 
Only  the  Holy  Ghost  can  inspire  creeds  that  will  live.  Put  he 
has  done  it  repeatedly,  and  can  do  it  again.  He  is  as  mighty 
and  active  now  as  he  was  in  any  former  age. 

A new  creed  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  should  be  under- 
taken by  the  Pan-Presbyterian  Council,  which  is  based  upon 
“ the  consensus  ” of  the  Peformed  Confessions,  but  has  not  de- 
fined it  as  yet.  This  was  the  very  first  subject  of  discussion  at 
' the  Council  in  Edinburgh,  1877,  and  led  to  a laborious  report  of 
I a committee  on  creeds  and  subscription  to  creeds.  The  report 
I was  accepted  by  the  second  Council  in  Philadelphia,  1880,  and 
another  international  committee  was  appointed  to  consider  the 
expediency  of  formulating  ‘Ghe  consensus.”  The  American 
branch  of  this  international  committee,  at  a meeting  in  the 
' chapel  of  the  Union  Theological  Seminary  of  Hew  York,  and 
l'  including  such  wise  and  orthodox  divines  as  Dr.  Shedd,  Dr.  A. 
' A.  Hodge,  and  Principal  Cavan,  unanimously  recommended  the 
preparation  of  a Consensus  ci-eed,  as  expedient  and  desirable. 
Put  Dr.  Hodge,  for  reasons  unknown,  changed  his  mind,  and 
voted  against  a Consensus  creed  when  the  several  branches  of 
• the  committee  met  at  Edinburgh.  The  cautious  conservatives 
feared  a minimum^  the  advanced  liberals  feared  a maximum  of 
■ orthodoxy,  and  so  the  whole  movement  was  crushed  between  the 
upper  and  lower  millstone  at  the  third  Council,  in  Pelfast,  1884. 
Put  the  conservatives  could  not  prevent  the  admission  of  the 
^ semi-Arminian  Cumberland  Presbyterians  into  the  Council  of 
i the  Pan -Presbyterian  Alliance.  I was  told  at  the  time  by  Dr. 
, Oswald  Dykes  (the  chief  framer  of  the  new  English  Preshy- 
^ terian  creed)  and  several  foreign  missionaries,  that  since  the 


40  CKEED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 


Pan-Presbyterian  Council  refused  to  help  them  in  this  matter, 
they  must  help  themselves,  and  prepare  a simple  and  popular 
creed  for  the  benefit  of  their  churches,  and  for  the  foreign  mis- 
sion fields,  which  it  is  folly  to  disturb  with  the  theological  con- 
troversies and  subtleties  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

Whether  the  consensus-creed  movement  will  ever  be  revived 
in  the  Council,  nobody  can  tell.  Put  there  is  a growing  desire 
for  some  new  statement  of  the  old  faith  in  the  language  of  the 
present  age,  a statement  less  metaphysical  and  more  practical, 
less  denominational  and  more  catholic  than  the  Westminster 
Confession.  It  will  come  in  God’s  own  good  time — perhaps  in 
this  or  the  next  generation. 

Conclusion. 

Let  us  be  honest,  and  confess  that  old  Calvinism  is  fast  dy- 
ing out.  It  has  done  a great  work,  and  has  done  it  well,  but 
cannot  satisfy  the  demands  of  the  present  age.  We  live  in  the 
nineteenth,  and  not  in  the  seventeenth  century.  Every  age 
must  produce  its  own  theology  and  has  its  own  mission  to  ful- 
fil. We  may  learn  wisdom  and  experience  from  the  past,  but 
we  ought  not  to  be  slaves  of  the  past,  and  recognize  no  final 
and  infallible  authority  but  that  of  Christ.  We  must  believe 
in  the  Holy  Spirit,  who  is  guiding  the  Church  to  ever  higher 
life  and  light.  lie  produced  reformations  in  the  past,  he  will 
produce  greater  reformations  in  the  future. 

I yield  to  no  man  in  sincere  admiration  for  St.  Augustin  of 
Hippo,  and  for  John  Calvin  of  Geneva,  and  have  stated  it  more 
than  once  in  public  print.  They  were  as  pure  and  holy  in 
character  as  they  were  strong  and  deep  in  intellect.  They 
stand  in  the  front  rank  of  theologians  of  all  ages,  and  their  in- 
fluence will  be  felt  to  the  end  of  time.  The  trutlis  which  they 
brought  forth  from  the  mine  of  God’s  Word  can  never  die  or 
lose  their  power.  St.  Augustin  impressed  his  mind  upon 
every  page  of  history,  and  his  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace  con- 
trolled the  theology  of  the  Peformers.  These  doctrines  tend 
to  humble  man  and  to  glorify  God.  They  will  always  remind 


CONCLUSION. 


41 


) 


r 

I 


f 


( ■ 


US  that  we  cannot  have  too  deep  a hatred  of  man’s  sin  and  too 
high  an  estimate  of  God’s  mercy. 

But  Augustin  ran  his  system  to  an  untenable  extreme.  It 
leaves  no  room  for  freedom,  except  in  the  single  case  of  Adam, 
who  by  one  act  of  disobedience  involved  the  whole  human  race 
in  the  slavery  of  sin.  It  suspends  the  history  of  the  world  upon 
that  one  act.  It  condemns  the  whole  race  to  everlasting  woe 
for  a single  transgression  committed  without  our  knowledge  and 
consent  six  thousand  years  ago.  Out  of  this  mass  of  corruption 
God  by  his  sovereign  pleasure  elected  a comparatively  small 
portion  of  the  human  family  to  everlasting  life,  and  leaves  the 
overwhelming  majority  to  everlasting  ruin,  without  doing  any- 
thing to  save  them.  Calvinism  intensified  this  system,  and  pro- 
duced heroic  races  like  the  Huguenots  of  France,  the  Puritans  of 
Old  and  Hew  England,  and  the  Covenanters  of  Scotland.  But 
the  Augustinian  system  was  unknown  to  the  ante-Nicene  and 
Eastern  Church.  The  Latin  Church  only  half-adopted  it,  and 
virtually  condemned  it  by  condemning  Jansenism.  The  Luth- 
eran Church  accepted  the  doctrine  of  the  slavery  of  the  human 
will  in  the  strongest  form,  and  also  the  unconditional  decree 
of  election,  therein  following  the  extravagant  views  of  Luther’s 
book  against  Erasmus,  but  repudiated  the  decree  of  reproba- 
tion, and  taught  the  universal  offer  of  salvation.  The  Re- 
formed Confessions  of  the  sixteenth  century  wisely  confined 
themselves  to  the  positive  part  of  predestination — the  decree  of 
election,  but  the  Westminster  Confession  added  to  it  the  nega- 
tive decree  of  reprobation  and  sharpened  it  into  a two-edged 
sword  against  Arminianism  and  against  itself. 

Arminianism  arose  and  progressed  in  the  heart  of  the  Re- 
formed Church  in  opposition  to  scholastic  Calvinism,  and 
through  Wesleyan  Methodism  it  has  become  one  of  the  strongest 
and  best  organized  agencies  for  the  revival  of  practical  religion 
and  for  the  conversion  of  the  world,  so  that  in  the  United  States 
this  youngest  of  the  great  evangelical  denominations  outnumbers 
all  others.  This  fact  is  a lesson  and  a warning  more  powerful 
than  any  argument. 

And  yet  Arminianism  and  Methodism  have  not  solved  the 


42  CREED  REVISION  AND  THE  WESTMINSTER  STANDARDS. 

theoretical  problems  on  which  they  differ  from  Calvinism.  We 
must  look  to  the  future,  when  God  will  raise  another  theolos:- 
ical  genius,  like  Augustin  or  Calvin,  who  will  substitute  some- 
thing better,  broader,  and  deeper  than  the  narrow  and  intolerant 
system  which  bears  their  honored  names. 

We  need  a theology,  we  need  a confession,  that  starts,  not 
from  eternal  decrees,  which  transcend  the  utmost  limits  of  our 
thoughts,  nor  from  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  nor 
from  the  Bible  principle,  nor  from  any  particular  doctrine,  but 
from  the  living  person  of  Jesus  ChriAt,Jdie  God-maii  and  S^- 
ylour  oLtlie  world.  This  is  the  burden  of  Peter’s  confession,  the 
fruitful  germ  of  all  creeds  ; this  is  the  central  fact  and  truth  on , 
which  all  true  Christians  can  agree.  We  need  a theology  and  I 
a confession  that  is  inspired  and  controlled,  not  by  the  idea  of  / 
Divine  justice,  which  is  a consuming  fire,  but  by  the  idea  of 
Divine  love,  which  is  life  and  peace.  For  “ God  is  love,”  and  . 
love  is  the  key  which  unlocks  his  character  and  all  his  works.  I 
And  this  love  extends  to  all  his  creatures,  and  has  made  abnn-  / 
dant  provision  in  Christ  for  the  salvation  of  ten  thousand  j 
worlds.  Love  is  the  chief  of  Christian  graces,  the  true  sign  of 
discipleship,  and  the  bond  of  perfection.  We  need  a theology 
and  a confession  that  is  more  human  than  Calvinism,  more  Di-  | 
vine  than  Arminianism,  and  more  Christian  and  catholic  than  j 
either ; a confession  as  broad  and  deep  as  God’s  love,  and  as 
strict  and  severe  as  God’s  justice.  We  need  a theology  and  a 
confession  that  will  not  only  bind  the  members  of  one  denom- 
ination together,  but  be  also  a bond  of  sympathy  between  the 
various  folds  of  the  one  flock  of  Christ,  and  prepare  the  way  | 
for  the  great  work  of  the  future — the  reunion  of  Christendom 
in  the  Creed  of  Christ. 


A PLEA  FOR  THE  REVISION 


OF 

THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION. 


The  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith  is  the  clearest,  strong- 
est, and  most  logical  statement  of  the  Calvinistic  system, 
but  contains  also  its  hardest  features,  which  belong  only  to  a school 
of  theology  in  the  Reformed  Churches,  and  have  always  been 
disputed.  These  are  the  connected  doctrines  of  reprobation^ 
preterition,  limited  atonement,  and  the  damnation  of  the  whole 
non-Christian  world,  including  (at  least  by  inference)  non-elect 
children  dying  in  infancy. 

The  passages  in  which  these  doctrines  are  taught  are  as 
follows : 

Chap.  IIL,  Sec.  3.  “ By  the  decree  of  God,  for  the  manifestation  of  His 
glory,  some  men  and  angels  are  predestinated  unto  everlasting  life,  and  others 
foreordained  to  everlasting  death.” 

Sec.  4.  “ These  angels  and  men,  thus  predestinated  and  foreordained,  are 
particularly  and  unchangeably  designed ; and  their  number  is  so  certain  and 
definite,  that  it  cannot  be  either  increased  or  diminished.” 

Sec.  6.  . , . “ Neither  are  any  other  redeemed  by  Christ,  effectually 

called,  justified,  adopted,  sanctified,  and  saved,  hut  the  elect  only.''* 

I Sec.  7.  “ The  rest  of  mankind  God  was  pleased,  according  to  tlie  unsearch- 
' able  counsel  of  His  own  will,  whereby  He  extendeth  or  withholdeth  mercy  as 
He  pleaseth,  for  the  glory  of  His  sovereign  power  over  His  creatures,  to  pass 
by,  and  to  ordain  them  to  dishonor  and  wrath  for  their  sin,  to  the  praise  of  His 
j glorious  justice.”  2 

I Chap.  VI.,  Sec.  1.  “Our  first  parents  being  seduced  by  the  subtlety  of 

^ A paper  read  November  4,  1889,  by  Dr.  Schaff  at  a special  meeting  of  the  Pres- 
I bytery  of  New  York,  after  Dr.  Shedd’s  plea  against  Revision. 

I ^ By  “passing  by,”  or  preterition,  is  meant,  of  course,  not  a temporary.,  but  a 
I permanent  omission,  with  everlasting  consequences,  in  harmony  with  Chap.  IIL, 


44 


A PLEA  FOR  THE  REVISION  OF 


Satan,  sinned  in  eating  the  forbidden  fruit.  This  their  sin  God  was  pleased, 
according  to  His  wise  and  holy  counsel,  to  permit,  having  purposed  to  order  it 
to  His  own  glory,” 

Chap.  X.,  Sec.  3.  '"'‘Elect  infants,  dying  in  infancy,  are  regenerated  and 
saved  by  Christ  through  the  Spirit,  who  worketh  when,  and  where,  and  how 
He  pleaseth.  So  also  are  all  other  elect  persons  who  are  incapable  of  being 
outwardly  called  by  the  ministry  of  the  Word.” 

Sec.  4.  “ Others^  not  elected^  although  they  may  be  called  by  the  ministry  of 
the  Word,  and  may  have  some  common  operations  of  the  Spirit,  yet  they 
never  truly  come  unto  Christ,  and  therefore  can  not  he  saved  ; much  less  can 
men,  not  professing  the  Christian  religion,  he  saved  in  any  other  way  whatso- 
ever, be  they  never  so  diligent  to  frame  their  lives  according  to  the  light  of 
nature  and  the  law  of  that  religion  they  do  profess : and  to  assert  and  main- 
tain that  they  may,  is  very  pernicious,  and  to  be  detested.” 

The  Confession  also  teaches  that  the  Bishop  of  Borne  is  the 
Antichrist  predicted  by  St.  Paul,  and  that  the  Papists,  i.e.^ 
the  Koman  Catholics,  are  idolaters. 

Chap.  XXV.,  Sec.  6.  “The  Pope  of  Borne  ...  is  that  Antichrist,  that 
man  of  sin  and  son  of  perdition,  that  exalteth  himself,  in  the  Church,  against 
Christ  and  all  that  is  called  God,”  ^ 

Chap.  XXIV.,  Sec.  3,  forbids  marriage  “with  infidels,  Papists,  or 
idolaters.'^ 

These  doctrines  have  long  since  been  abandoned  in  all  the 
Beformed  Churches  on  the  Continent  of  Europe.  They  are 
now  on  trial  in  the  Presbyterian  Churches  of  the  United  States 
and  Great  Britain.  A simultaneous  movement  has  suddenly 
and  independently  broken  out  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic, 
and  is  rapidly  spreading  among  ministers  and  intelligent  lay- 
men, in  favor  of  such  a revision  of  the  Westminster  Confession 
as  will  relieve  it  of  these  offensive  features,  give  prominence  to 
the  precious  doctrine  of  God’s  love  to  all  mankind,  and  express 

Sec.  34.  In  a restricted  sense  it  would  be  true,  as  the  salvation  of  the  world 
proceeds  gradually,  beginning  with  the  Jews,  and  passing  to  the  Gentiles  in  a certain 
order  of  providential  preparation  and  succession. 

1 2 Thess.  ii.  3,  4.  Paul  speaks  here  of  “ a mystery  of  lawlessness”  {avofxia)  that 
was  already  at  work  in  his  own  day  (ver.  7).  Whatever  he  meant  by  it,  he  could 
not  mean  the  Pope,  who  did  not  yet  exist,  and  who  could  hardly  be  charged  with 
lawlessness,  but  rather  with  the  very  opposite — despotism.  As  to  the  term  “Anti- 
christ,” it  is  only  used  by  John,  and  he  speaks  of  7nang  Antichrists  in  his  own  day 
in  Asia  Minor,  and  characterizes  them  as  false  teachers  who  denied  the  incarnation 
(which  the  papacy  never  did). — 1 John  ii.  18,  22  ; iv.  3 ; 2 John  7. 


THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION. 


45 


the  living  faith  of  the  Church  in  the  present  age.  I cannot  but 
see  in  this  movement  the  finger  of  God,  who  calls  the  Presby- 
terian Church  to  a higher,  broader,  and  more  liberal  position  in 
theory  and  practice.  It  is  stronger  than  the  reunion  movement 
which,  twenty  years  ago,  melted  the  minds  and  hearts  of  the 
Old  and  New  School  into  one  communion,  for  greater  and  bet- 
ter work  than  they  have  ever  done  before. 

Without  entering  into  an  argument,  I shall  briefly  present 
my  objections  to  the  doctrines  of  reprobation  and  preterition, 
and  my  reasons  for  a revision : 

1.  Supposing  these  doctrines  were  Scriptural,  they  are  out 
of  place  in  a public  Confession  of  Faith,  where  they  can  do  no 
possible  good,  but  a great  deal  of  harm.  They  ought  to  be  left, 
with  other  transcendent  and  ante-mundane  mysteries,  to  scien- 
tific and  speculative  theology,  where  they  properly  belong. 
Calvin  himself  set  this  example  by  omitting  them  from  his 
Catechism,  and  Caspar  Olevianus  and  Zacharias  Ursinus  fol- 
lowed it  in  the  Heidelberg  Catechism.  There  is  a great  dif- 
ference between  a confession  of  faith  and  a system  of  theology. 

2.  They  are  based  upon  a misunderstanding  of  a few  ob- 
scure passages  of  the  Bible,  which  nearly  all  modern  exegetes  of 
all  schools  explain  differently  and  in  harmony  with  the  clear 
and  undisputed  teaching  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  St.  Paul 
undoubtedly  teaches  Divine  sovereignty  in  the  ninth  chapter  of 
his  Epistle  to  the  Eomans — the  strong  fortress  of  supralapsa- 
rianism — but  in  the  tenth  chapter  he  teaches  as  clearly  human 
responsibility,  and  in  the  eleventh  chapter  the  future  conver- 
sion of  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  ” and  of  all  Israel ; ” and 
he  winds  up  the  discussion  with  that  wonderful  sentence  which 
contains  the  ultimate  solution  of  this  mysterious  problem  (xi. 
32) : “ God  hath  shut  up  all  unto  disobedience,  that  he  might 
have  mercy  upon  all  ” [not  ‘‘  upon  some,”  or  “ the  elect  only  ”]. 
Let  us  not  stick  in  the  darkness  of  the  ninth,  but  go  on  to  the 
glorious  light  of  the  eleventh  chapter. 

3.  They  are  inconsistent  with  the  whole  spirit  of  the  gos- 
pel, which  expressly  and  repeatedly  teaches  that  God  is  love  ; 


46 


A PLEA  FOE  THE  EEVISION  OF 


that  His  love  extends  to  all  mankind ; that  He  wills  all  men  to 
be  saved,  and  none  to  perish  ; that  Christ  is  the  Saviour  of  the 
race,  and  died  not  only  for  our  sins,  but  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world ; that  the  gospel  is  freely  and  sincerely  offered  to 
all  men,  and  should  be  preached  to  every  creature ; that  be- 
lievers are  saved  by  free  grace,  but  the  impenitent  are  lost  by 
their  own  guilt.  Compare  John  iii.  16  ; 1 John  iv.  8,  16 ; 1 
Tim.  ii.  4;  2 Pet.  iii.  9;  1 John  ii.  2,  etc. 

God’s  saving  love  in  Christ  to  all  mankind  is  the  central 
truth  of  Christianity,  and  the  very  marrow  of  the  gospel,  and 
ought  to  be  the  heart  and  soul  of  every  evangelical  Confession 
of  Faith.  The  older  Calvinism  exalts  God’s  love  to  the  elect,  but 
“ passes  by  the  rest  of  mankind.”  It  admits  the  common  grace 
shown  to  all,  but  confines  the  special  or  saving  grace  to  a few. 
It  calls  upon  all  men  to  repent,  but  denies  that  any  man  can 
repent  who  is  not  among  the  elect.  It  did  little  or  nothing  for 
the  conversion  of  the  heathen  before  the  great  missionary  re- 
vival which  inspires  the  churches  of  our  age. 

4.  Foreordination  of  some  men  to  everlasting  life,  and  of 
others  to  everlasting  death,  and  preterition  of  all  the  non-elect 
(including  the  whole  heathen  world),  are  equally  inconsistent 
with  a proper  conception  of  Divine  justice,  and  pervert  it  into 
an  arbitrary  partiality  for  the  circle  of  the  elect,  who  are 
equally  guilty,  and  an  arbitrary  neglect  of  the  great  mass  of 
men.  Justice  is  strictly  impartial,  and  adapts  rewards  and 
punishments  to  man’s  merits  and  opportunities.  What  would 
you  think  of  a father  who  would  shower  all  his  blessings  upon 
two  or  three  of  his  children,  and  neglect  and  disinherit  all  the 
rest,  and  who  would  make  such  a discrimination  from  arbitrary 
choice  without  any  regard  to  moral  merit  ? 

It  is  only  by  an  indefinite  extension  of  the  decree  of  election 
beyond  the  limits  of  the  visible  Church  that  Calvinism  can  be 
relieved  of  the  charge  of  narrowness,  and  be  measurably  rec- 
onciled with  the  idea  of  Divine  justice  and  wisdom ; but  the 
Westminster  Confession  gives  the  benefit  of  such  extension 
onl}^  to  elect  infants  dying  in  infancy,  and  to  incapables,  and 
denies  it  to  all  adults  who  are  ignorant  of  Christianity,  and 


i 


THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION. 


47 


profess  any  other  religion,  although  they  “frame  their  lives 
according  to  the  light  of  nature.’’ 

5.  These  doctrines  are  not  taught  in  the  oecumenical  creeds, 
nor  in  the  older  Reformed  Confessions,  with  the  exception  of 
the  Genevan  Consensus  (1552),  the  Lambeth  Articles  (1595), 
and  the  Irish  Articles  (1615),  which  documents  never  had 
much  authority,  and  have  long  since  gone  out  of  use.  Supralap- 
sarianism  represents  only  a theological  school  in  the  Reformed 
Church,  and  a very  respectable  one,  but  not  the  Church  itself ; 
it  was,  and  should  be  tolerated,  but  it  was  not,  and  should  not 
be,  enjoined  or  imposed.  It  has,  in  my  judgment,  greater 
logical  and  speculative  force  than  infralapsarianism ; but  it 
was  always  felt  by  the  majority  of  Reformed  divines  that  by 
irresistible  logic  it  makes  God  the  author  of  sin  and  death,  and 
that  it  would  consistently  lead  to  hopeless  fatalism  and  pan- 
theism, from  which  the  supralapsarians  themselves  shrink  back 
with  horror.  Hence  nearly  all  the  Confessions  stop  within  the 
limits  of  infralapsarianism.  Christian  truth  rises  above  the 
narrow  limitations  of  logic  and  mathematics. 

The  Theses  of  Berne  (1528),  the  First  Confession  of  Basel 
(1532),  the  First  Helvetic  or  Second  Basel  Confession  (1536), 
the  Geneva  Catechism  of  Calvin  (1545),  the  Galilean  Con- 
fession (1559),  the  Belgic  Confession  (1561),  the  Heidelberg 
Catechism  (1563),  the  Second  Helvetic  Confession  (1566),  the 
First  and  Second  Scotch  Confessions  (1560  and  1580),  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles  (1571),  and  even  the  Canons  of  the  Synod 
of  Dort  (1619),  and  the  Shorter  Westminster  Catechism 
(1647),^  are  silent  on  the  decree  of  reprobation  and  preterition, 
and  coniine  themselves  to  the  positive,  undisputed,  and  most 
comforting  doctrine  of  the  election  of  believers  by  free  grace  to 
everlasting  life. 

And  in  the  Westminster  Assembly  itself,  several  of  the 
ablest  men,  as  Calamy,  Seaman,  Arrowsmith,  and  Gataker, 
were  opposed  to  the  majority  on  those  knotty  points,  and 

^ But  the  Larger  Catechism  agrees  with  the  Confession  and  teaches  that  “God 
. . . pasfied  by,  a.n(\.  foreordained  th.QXQst  non-ele.cf]  to  dishonor  and 

wrath^  to  be  for  their  sin  inflicted,  to  the  praise  of  the  glory  of  His  justice.”  Qu.  xiii. 


48 


A PLEA  FOK  THE  REVISION  OF 


advocated  wliat  is  called  hypothetical  or  conditional  nniversal- 
isin,  i.e.j  a sincere  Divine  intention  and  provision  for  the  sal- 
vation of  all  men  on  condition  of  faith. 

6.  These  doctrines  are  no  longer  believed  by  the  majority 
of  Presbyterians,  nor  preached  by  any  Presbyterian  ministe]'  as 
far  as  I know.^  They  certainly  could  not  be  preached  in  any 
pulpit  without  emptying  the  pews.  Presbyterian  ministers,  on 
the  contrary,  uniformly  assume  in  their  sermons  the  fi-ee  and 
sincere  offer  of  salvation  to  all  men,  and  the  sole  responsibility 
of  the  sinner  for  rejecting  the  gospel. 

What  cannot  be  preached  in  the  church  and  taught  in  the 
Sunday-school,  ought  not  to  be  put  into  a Confession  of  Faith, 
and  imposed  as  a yoke  upon  the  conscience  of  ministers  and 
elders. 

7.  They  obstruct  the  progress  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  ; 
they  give  aid  and  comfort  to  her  enemies,  and  plausibility  to 
their  charges  and  misrepresentations ; they  have  in  times  past 
driven  away  from  the  Confession  a large  party  of  English 
Presbyterians,  'New  England  Congregationalists,  and  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterians,  and  they  will  in  future  prevent  many 
promising  students  from  entering  the  ministry,  and  intelligent 
laymen  from  serving  as  elders,  so  long  as  they  are  required  to 
subscribe  that  document  as  “ containing  the  system  of  doctrine 
taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.”  “ 

It  is  true  this  formula  of  subscription,  as  generally  under- 
stood by  ministers  and  elders,  is  fortunately  very  liberal,  and 
gives  a large  margin  for  dissent.  Put  if  the  word  “ system  ” is 
used  in  the  strict  sense,  it  is  not  applicable  to  the  Bible  at  all  ; 
for  the  Bible  contains  an  infinite  variety  of  truths,  and  is  as  far 
above  the  narrow  limitations  of  any  particular  or  denomina- 

* Dr.  Cuyler  of  Brooklyn,  an  experienced  Presbyterian  pastor,  goes  much  farther, 
and  asserts  that  “ ninety -nine  hundredths”  do  not  believe  these  features  of  the 
Westminster  Confession.  See  " The  New  York  Evangelist”  for  October  31,  1889. 
When  Dr.  Schalf  read  his  more  moderate  statement  in  Presbytery,  he  asked  the 
brethren  present  to  contradict  his  assertion  by  rising,  if  any  of  them  ever  preached 
on  the  decree  of  reprobation  and  preterition ; but  no  one  rose.  Silence  gives  con- 
sent. 

2 This  is  the  subscription  required  of  all  church  officers,  ministers,  ruling  elders, 
and  deacons,  according  to  the  Form  of  Government,  chaps,  xiii.,  xiv.,  and  xv. 


THE  WESTmNSTEE  CONFESSION. 


49 


tional  sj^stem  of  human  theology,  as  nature  is  above  every  sys- 
tem of  natural  philosophy,  and  history  above  the  compends  of 
historians.  It  would  be  better  to  abolish  subscription  alto- 
gether, or  so  to  alter  the  Confession  as  to  make  it  unobjection- 
able, that  subscription  to  it  may  be  an  act  of  cheerful  and 
whole-hearted  assent. 

A revision  would  not  be  complete  without  striking  out  the 
incidental  and  unnecessary  denunciation  of  the  Pope  as  Anti- 
christ, and  of  two  hundred  millions  of  professed  worshippers  of 
Christ  as  idolaters.  Such  a denunciation  can  be  easily  ex. 
plained  from  the  polemical  heat  and  political  complications  of 
England  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  but  calmly 
viewed  from  the  present  stage  of  liistorical  knowledge,  the 
charge  is  untrue,  unjust,  uncharitable,  and  unchristian,  as  well 
as  out  of  place  in  a religious  creed  ; and  no  wise  man  or  body 
of  men  would  now  venture  to  insert  it. 

Dr.  Archibald  Alexander  and  Dr.  Charles  Hodge,  the 
fathers  and  founders  of  Princeton  theology,  have  done  the 
greatest  service  to  the  Presbyterian  Church  by  liberalizing 
the  Calvinistic  theology.  Dr.  Hodge  boldly  opposed  the  un- 
charitable anti-popery  fanaticism  of  his  day,  and  maintained, 
against  the  decision  of  the  Old  School  General  Assembly  of 
1845,  the  Church  character  of  the  Ponian  Catholic  commun- 
ion, and  the  validity  of  her  baptism.  It  was  an  equally  great 
service  that  the  same  honored  and  beloved  divine  (with  whom 
I had  a delightful  personal  acquaintance)  obliterated  the  West- 
minster distinction  between  elect  and  reprobate  infants,  and 
taught  the  salvation  of  all  infants  dying  in  infancy.^  Yea,  he 
goes  so  far  as  to  assert,  on  the  closing  page  of  his  Systematic 
Theology  (iii.,  880),  that  the  number  of  the  lost  in  comparison 
with  the  whole  number  of  the  saved  will  be  very  inconsider- 
able.” I confess  my  own  ignorance  on  the  numerical  aspect 
of  this  problem,  but  most  sincerely  hope  that  Dr.  Hodge  is 

1 Dr.  Shedd  also,  while  he  still  teaches  reprobation  and  preterition  as  a necessary 
part  of  Calvinistic  theology,  agi-ees  with  Princeton,  whether  logically  or  illogically, 
in  extending  election  to  all  infants  dying  in  infancy,  and  to  some  adults  among  the 
heathen.  A very  important  concession,  which  diminishes  the  practical  importance 
of  preterition. 


50 


A PLEA  FOK  THE  REVISION  OF 


right.  At  all  events  he  made  an  immense  progress  in  the  right 
direction,  and  the  goodness  of  his  heart  and  his  amiable  temper 
gave  to  his  whole  theology  a sweet,  evangelical,  and  catholic 
tone,  which  favorably  contrasts  with  the  severity  and  narrow- 
ness of  older  systems. 

I^ow  is  the  providential  occasion  to  proceed  a step  farther, 
and  to  remove  from  the  Confession  itself  those  stumbling-blocks 
and  burdens  which  are  becoming  more  and  more  unbearable  to 
a large  number  of  conscientious  and  liberal-minded  men. 

If  the  Church  refuses  to  make  the  reasonable  chano^es  de- 
manded  by  many  of  her  most  loyal  sons,  she  will  virtually  rein- 
dorse  and  deliberately  profess  before  the  world  the  most  ob- 
noxious features  of  the  theology  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
and  make  them  ten  times  more  offensive  and  obstructive  to  the 
progress  of  the  Church  hereafter. 

Nobody  asserts  the  infallibility  of  the  Westminster  Confes- 
sion, and  nobody  denies  the  right  of  revision.  All  the  argu- 
ments which  can  be  urged,  are  arguments  of  inexpediency 
against  revision,  arguments  of  expediency  for  revision.  The 
latter  are  stronger.  j 

The  Confession  has  already  been  revised,  in  1788  and  1888,  / 

in  several  important  articles,  bearing  upon  Church  and  State, 
and  forbidden  marriages,  and  it  is  all  the  better  and  more  ac-  j 
ceptable  for  these  changes.  It  is  not  more  difficult  to  remove  I 
reprobation  and  preterition,  the  damnation  of  the  heathen,  and  j 
the  denunciation  of  Papists  from  the  Confession,  than  it  was  a j 
hundred  years  ago  to  reconstruct  chap,  xx.,  4 ; xxiii.,  3 ; xxxi.,  1,  I 
2,  in  favor  of  the  doctrine  of  separation  of  Church  and  State,  I 
which  the  Westminster  Assembly,  itself  the  creature  of  the  f 
State  and  responsible  to  it,  would  have  indignantly  rejected  as  [ 
a dangerous  heresy  and  downright  political  atheism.  Why  then 
not  make  these  further  changes  and  save  the  life  and  usefulness  1 
of  a venerable  document  for  other  generations  ? | 

Or  if  this  cannot  be  done  without  mutilating  the  document,  ^ 
then  in  humble  reliance  upon  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  is  ever  f 
guiding  the  Church,  let  us  take  the  more  radical  step,  with  or 
through  the  Pan-Presbyterian  Council,  of  preparing  a brief, 


THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION. 


51 


simple,  and  popular  creed,  which  shall  clearly  and  tersely  ex- 
press, for  laymen  as  well  as  ministers,  the  cardinal  doctrines 
of  faith  and  duty,  and  leave  metaphysics  and  polemics  to 
scientific  theology ; a creed  that  can  be  subscribed,  taught,  and 
preached  ex  animo^  without  any  mental  reservation,  or  any  un- 
natural explanation  ; a creed  that  is  fu] 


gospel  of  God’s  infinite  love  in  Christ 
whole  world. 


Such  a consensus-creed  would  be  a bond  of  union  between 
the  different  branches  of  the  Reformed  Church  in  Europe  and 
America  and  in  distant  mission  fields,  and  prepare  the  way  for 
a wider  union  with  other  Evangelical  Churches.  It  ought  not 
to  contradict  the  Westminster  Confession,  but  retain  its  best 
features,  and  supplement  it  by  those  truths  of  the  Scriptures 
which  are  now  made  most  vital  and  important  in  the  mind  of 
the  Church,  and  which  are  best  calculated  to  promote  its  mis- 
sion at  home  and  abroad. 

The  Congregationalists  in  America  made  a new  creed  of 
Twelve  Articles  in  1883,*  and  the  English  Presbyterians  made 
one  of  Twenty-four  Articles  in  1888;^  both  are  thoroughly 
evangelical,  and  skilfully  avoid  all  the  knotty  and  disputed 
points  of  the  scholastic  Calvinism  of  a by-gone  age.  The  Pres- 
byterian Church  of  the  United  States,  with  or  without  the  co- 
operation of  the  Pan-Presbyterian  Council,  has  sufficient  wis- 
dom, learning,  and  piety  to  produce  a creed  to  suit  her  wants. 

In  conclusion  ; lam  in  favor  of  both  a revision  of  the  West- 
minster Confession  by  the  General  Assembly,  and  an  oecumeni- 
cal Reformed  Consensus  to  be  prepared  by  the  Pan-Presbyte- 
rian Council.  If  we  cannot  have  both,  let  us  at  least  have  one 
of  the  two,  and  I shall  be  satisfied  with  either.  Something 
must  and  will  be  done  to  bring  the  Presbyterian  Standards  into 
harmony  with  the  living  Church  of  to-day,  and  to  make  them 
a potent  factor  for  the  instruction  and  edification  of  the  people. 

1 Printed  in  Schaff’s  Creeds  of  Christendom^  vol.  iii. , p.  910  seq.  Fourth 
Edition,  1884. 

2 Published  in  the  “ Minutes  of  the  Synod  of  the  Presbyt.  Church  of  England, 
held  at  London,  1889,”  London,  pp.  261  sqq.,  and  in  “The  N.  Y.  Evangelist”  for 
October  31,  1889.  See  next  page. 


DOCUMENT  I. 


THE  NEW  CONFESSION  AND  DECLARATORY  STATEMENT 

OF  THE 

PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


The  Presbyterian  Church  of  England,  instead  of  revising 
the  Westminster  Confession,  has  adopted  the  more  radical 
course  of  preparing  a new  Confession,  together  with  a Declara- 
tory Statement,  which  is  to  be  used  alongside  of  the  old  for 
practical  purposes.  It  was  prepared  with  great  care  by  a Sy- 
nodical Committee  during  the  last  four  years  (1885-89),  and 
has  undergone  several  revisions.  The  Rev.  J.  Oswald  Dykes,  || 
for  several  years  the  foremost  Presbyterian  preacher  in  Lon-  j 
don,  now  Principal  of  the  Presbyterian  Theological  College  j 
in  that  city,  acted  as  convener  of  the  Synodical  Committee. 
The  Creed,  with  the  Declaratory  Statement,  is  now  before  the 
English  Presbyterian  Church  for  consideration,  and  will,  in  all 
probability,  be  adopted  in  substance  in  the  course  of  the  year 
1890.  A new  formula  of  subscription  was  also  submitted  by 
the  Committee,  but  has  not  yet  been  acted  upon.* 

It  is  often  said  that  the  present  generation  is  unfitted  to 
make  a new  Confession  of  Faith.  This  document  is  an  answer. 

It  shows  what  can  be  done  by  Presbyterians  in  this  direc- 
tion. It  will  bear  a comparison  with  the  older  Reformed  Con- 
fessions of  Faith,  and  in  several  respects  it  is  superior  to  them. 

It  wisely  omits  metaphysical  and  polemical  topics,  and  presents 

^ It  is  as  follows  : “ Do  you  sincerely  receive  and  adopt,  as  in  accordance  with  the 
teaching  of  Holy  Scripture,  the  doctrine  contained  in  the  Westminster  Confession 
of  Faith,  as  the  said  Confession  is  understood  by  this  Church  in  conformity  with  the 
Declaratory  Act  of  1 889  ; and  do  you  consent  to  the  said  Confession  as  the  standard 
by  which  your  teaching  in  this  Church  shall  be  judged  ? ” 


THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PEESBYTEEIAN  CHUECH.  63 


the  essentia]  doctrines  of  the  gospel  in  the  right  proportion  and 
with  devotional  fervor.  Altogether  it  is  an  admirable  docu- 
ment, full  of  faith  and  the  Holj  Ghost,  and  answers  all  the 
reasonable  demands  of  those  who  favor  revision  in  the  form  of 
a new  Confession.  Its  language,  moreover,  is  chiefly  borrowed, 
or  in  harmony  with,  older  creeds,  as  is  made  manifest  by  the 
references  given  in  the  copies  printed  for  private  circulation. 
This  Confession  will  be  of  great  value  in  the  preparation  of  a 
Ileformed  Consensus-Creed,  which  was  abruptly  broken  off  at 
the  Third  Council  of  the  Alliance  of  Heformed  Churches,  in 
Belfast,  1884,  but  will  probably  be  revived  at  the  Fifth  Coun- 
cil, to  be  held  in  Toronto,  Canada,  in  1892. 


THE  AETICLES  OF  THE  FAITH  AS  HELD  BY  THE 
PEESBYTEEL4N  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 

(Report  of  tlie  Synod’s  Committee,  as  submitted  to  the  Synod  of  1889.) 

I. 

Of  God. 

We  believe  in  and  adore  one  living  and  true  God,  who  is 
spirit  and  the  Father  of  spirits,  present  in  every  place,  per- 
sonal, inflnite,  and  eternal,  the  almighty  Author  and  sovereign 
Lord  of  all ; most  blessed,  most  holy,  and  most  free  ; perfect 
in  wisdom,  justice,  truth,  and  love  ; to  us  most  merciful  and 
gracious ; unto  whom  only  we  must  cleave,  whom  only  we 
must  worship  and  obey.  To  Him  be  glory  forever ! Amen. 

II. 

Of  the  Trinity. 

We  acknowledge,  with  the  ancient  Church,  the  mystery  of 
the  Holy  Trinity  as  revealed  in  Scripture,  and  believe  that  in 
the  unity  of  the  ever-blessed  Godhead  there  are  three  Persons, 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  one  substance, 
equal  in  power  and  glory. 


54  THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PEESBYTEKIAN  CHUKCH, 


III. 

Of  Creation, 

We  believe  that  Almighty  God,  for  His  own  holy  and  lov- 
ing ends,  was  pleased  in  the  beginning  to  create  the  heavens  and 
the  earth,  by  the  Son,  the  Eternal  Word  ; and  through  pro- 
gressive stages,  to  fashion  and  order  this  world,  giving  life  to 
every  creature  ; and  to  make  man  in  His  own  image,  that  he 
might  glorify  and  enjoy  God,  occupying  and  subduing  the 
earth,  and  having  dominion  over  the  creatures,  to  the  praise  of 
his  Maker’s  name. 

lY. 

Of  Providence. 

We  believe  that  God  the  Creator  upholds  all  things  by 
the  word  of  His  power,  preserving  and  providing  for  all  His 
creatures,  according  to  the  laws  of  their  being ; and  that  He, 
through  the  presence  and  energy  of  His  Spirit  in  nature  and 
history,  disposes  and  governs  all  events  for  His  own  high  de-  | 
sign  ; yet  is  He  not  in  anywise  the  author  or  approver  of  sin, 
neither  are  the  freedom  and  responsibility  of  man  taken  away, , 
nor  have  any  bounds  been  set  to  the  sovereign  liberty  of  Him 
who  worketh  when  and  where  and  how  He  pleaseth. 

V.  i 

Of  the  Fall,  i 

We  believe  and  confess  that  our  first  father,  Adam,  the 
representative  head  as  well  as  common  ancestor  of  mankind, 
transgressed  the  commandment  of  God  through  temptation  of 
the  devil,  by  which  transgression  he  fell,  and  alj  mankind  in 
him,  from  his  original  state  of  innocence  and  communion  with 
God  ; and  so  all  men  have  come  under  just  condemnation,  are 
subject  to  the  penalty  of  death,  and  inherit  a sinful  nature, 
degenerate  in  every  part,  and  estranged  from  God,  from  which 
proceed  all  actual  transgressions:  and  we  acknowledge  that  out 
of  this  condition  no  man  is  able  to  deliver  himself. 


THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PEESBYTERIAN  CHTJKCH.  55 


YI. 

Of  Saving  Grace. 

We  believe  and  proclaim  that  God,  who  is  rich  in  mercy  as 
well  as  of  perfect  justice,  was  moved  by  Ilis  great  love  to  man 
to  hold  forth  from  the  tirst  a promise  of  redemption,  which 
from  age  to  age  He  confirmed  and  unfolded,  and  that,  in  the 
fulness  of  the  time.  He  accomplished  His  gracious  purpose  by 
sendino;  His  Son  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world  : wherefore  our 
salvation  out  of  sin  and  misery  is  ever  to  be  ascribed  to  free  and 
sovereign  grace. 

YIL 

Of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

We  believe  in  and  confess,  with  the  ancient  Church,  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who,  being  the  Eternal  Son  of  God,  became 
man  by  taking  to  Himself  a true  body  and  soul,  yet  without 
sin,  being  conceived  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  born 
of  the  Virgin  Maiy ; so  that  He  is  both  God  and  Man,  two 
whole,  perfect,  and  distinct  natures,  the  divine  and  the  human, 
being  inseparably  joined  together  in  one  person,  that  He  might 
be  the  Mediator  between  God  and  man,  by  whom  alone  we 
must  be  saved. 


YHI. 

Of  the  ^Vorh  of  Christ. 

We  believe  that  the  Mediator,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  being 
anointed  with  the  Holy  Spirit  to  proclaim  and  set  up  the  King- 
dom of  God  among  men,  did  by  His  perfect  life  on  earth, 
through  words  and  deeds  of  grace,  declare  the  Father,  whose 
image  He  is;  and  did  fully  satisfy  divine  justice,  and  obtain 
for  us  forgiveness  of  sins,  reconciliation  to  God,  and  the  gift  of 
eternal  life,  through  His  obedience  on  our  behalf  to  the  law 
and  will  of  His  Father,  even  unto  the  death  of  the  cross, 
wherein,  bearing  our  sins,  He  offered  Himself  up  a sacrifice 
without  spot  to  God. 


56  THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 


IX. 

Of  the  Exaltation  of  Christ. 

We  believe  that  Jesus  Christ,  being  for  our  offences  cruci- 
fied, dead,  and  buried,  saw  no  corruption,  but  was  raised  again 
on  the  third  day,  in  whose  risen  life  we  live  anew,  and  have 
tlie  pledge  of  a blessed  resurrection ; that  in  the  same  body  in 
which  He  rose.  He  ascended  into  heaven,  where,  as  our  High 
Priest,  He  inaketh  continual  intercession  for  us ; and  that  He 
sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  Head  of  the  Church,  clothed 
with  authority  and  power  as  Lord  over  all. 


X. 

Of  the  Gosjpel. 

We  hold  fast  and  proclaim  that  God,  who  willeth  that  all 
men  should  be  saved  and  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth, 
has,  by  His  Son  our  Saviour,  given  commission  to  the  Church 
to  preach  unto  all  nations  the  gospel  of  His  grace,  wlierein  He 
freely  offers  to  all  men  forgiveness  and  eternal  life,  calling  on 
them  to  turn  from  sin  to  God,  and  to  receive  and  rest  by  faith 
upon  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

XL 

Of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

We  believe  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Lord,  the  Giver  of  life, 
■who  worketh  freely  as  He  will,  without  whose  gracious  influ- 
ence there  is  no  salvation,  and  whom  the  Father  never  with- 
holds from  any  who  ask  for  Him ; and  we  give  thanks  that  He 
has  in  every  age  moved  on  the  hearts  of  men  ; that  He  spake 
by  the  prophets  ; that  through  our  exalted  Saviour  He  was  sent 
forth  in  power  to  convict  the  world  of  sin,  to  enlighten  the 
minds  of  men  in  the  knowledge  of  Christ,  and  to  persuade  and 
enable  them  to  obey  the  call  of  the  gospel ; and  that  He  abides 
with  the  Church,  dwelling  in  every  believer  as  the  Spirit  of 
truth,  of  holiness,  and  of  comfort. 


THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PKESBYTEKIAN  CHUECH.  57 


XII. 

Of  Election  and  Regeneration. 

"We  humbly  own  and  believe  that  God  the  Father,  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world,  was  pleased  of  His  sovereign 
grace  to  choose  a people  unto  Himself  in  Christ,  whom  He 
gave  to  the  Son,  and  to  whom  the  Holy  Spirit  imparts  spiritual 
life  by  a secret  and  wonderful  operation  of  His  power,  using 
as  His  ordinary  means,  where  years  of  understanding  have 
been  reached,  the  truths  of  His  Word  in  ways  agreeable  to  the 
nature  of  man  ; so  that,  being  born  from  above,  they  are  the 
children  of  God,  created  in  Christ  Jesus  unto  good  works. 

XHI. 

Of  Jnstification  hy  Faith. 

AYe  believe  that  everyone,  who  through  the  quickening 
grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  repents,  and  believes  the  gospel,  con- 
fessing and  forsaking  his  sins,  and  humbly  relying  upon  Christ 
alone  for  salvation,  is  freely  pardoned  and  accepted  as  righteous 
in  the  sight  of  God,  solely  on  the  ground  of  Christ’s  perfect 
obedience  and  atoning  sacrifice. 

XIY. 

Of  Sonship  in  Christ. 

We  believe  that  those  who  receive  Christ  by  faith  are  vitally 
united  to  Him,  and  become  partakers  in  all  the  benefits  of  His 
redemption  ; that  they  are  adopted  into  the  family  of  God  ; 
and  that  they  have  the  Spirit  of  His  Son  abiding  in  them,  the 
earnest  of  their  inheritance. 


XY. 

Of  the  Law  of  the  JLevj  Obedience. 

AYe  believe  and  acknowledge  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  has 
laid  His  people  by  His  grace  under  new  obligation  to  keep  the 


58  THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PKESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 


perfect  Law  of  God  ; and  that  by  precept  and  example  He  has 
enlarged  onr  knowledge  of  that  Law,  and  illustrated  the  spirit 
of  filial  love  in  which  the  divine  will  is  to  be  obeyed. 

XYI. 

Of  Christian  Perseverance, 

We  bless  God  that  the  obedience  of  Christians,  though  in 
this  life  always  imperfect,  is  yet  accepted  for  Christ’s  sake  and 
pleasing  to  God,  being  the  fruit  of  union  to  Christ  and  the  evi- 
dence of  a living  faith  ; and  that  in  measure  as  they  surrender 
themselves  to  His  Spirit,  and  follow  the  guidance  of  His  Word, 
they  receive  strength  for  daily  service,  and  grow  in  holiness 
after  the  image  of  their  Lord  ; or  if,  through  unwatchfulness 
and  neglect  of  prayer,  any  of  them  fall  into  grievous  sin,  yet 
by  the  mercy  of  God  who  abideth  faithful  they  are  not  cast  off, 
but  are  chastened  for  their  backsliding,  and  through  repentance 
restored  to  His  favor,  so  that  they  perish  not. 

XYII. 

Of  the  Church. 

We  acknowledge  one  holy  catholic  Church,  the  innumerable 
company  of  saints  of  every  age  and  nation,  who,  being  united 
by  tlie  Holy  Spirit  to  Christ  their  Head,  are  one  body  in  Him, 
and  have  communion  with  their  Lord  and  with  one  another : 
further,  we  receive  it  as  the  will  of  Christ  that  His  Church  on 
earth  should  exist  as  a visible  and  sacred  brotherhood,  organ- 
ized for  the  confession  of  His  name,  the  public  worship  of  God, 
the  upbuilding  of  the  saints,  and  the  proclamation  of  the  gos- 
pel ; and  we  acknowledge,  as  a part,  more  or  less  pure,  of  this 
universal  brotherhood,  every  particular  Church  throughout  the 
world  which  professes  faith  in  Jesus  Christ  and  obedience  to 
Him,  as  Divine  Lord  and  Saviour. 


THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.  59 


XYIIL 

Of  Church  Order  and  Fellowship, 

We  believe  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  sole  Head  of 
His  Church,  has  appointed  its  worship,  teaching,  discipline, 
and  government  to  be  administered,  according  to  His  will 
revealed  in  Holy  Scripture,  by  officers  chosen  for  their  fitness, 
and  duly  set  apart  to  their  office  ; and  although  the  visible 
Church,  even  in  its  purest  branch,  may  contain  unworthy  mem- 
bers, and  is  liable  to  err,  yet  believers  ought  not  lightly  to 
separate  themselves  from  its  communion,  but  are  to  live  in 
fellowship  with  their  brethren : which  fellowship  is  to  be  ex- 
tended, as  God  gives  opportunity,  to  all  who  in  every  place  call 
upon  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus. 


XIX. 

Of  Holy  Scripture, 

We  believe  that  God,  who  manifests  Himself  in  creation 
and  providence,  and  especially  in  the  spirit  of  man,  has  been 
pleased  to  reveal  His  mind  and  will  for  our  salvation  at  suc- 
cessive .periods  and  in  various  ways ; and  that  this  Hevelation 
has  been,  so  far  as  needful,  committed  to  writing  by  men  inspired 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  so  that  the  Word  of  God  is  now  contained 
in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  Xew  Testaments,  which  are 
therefore  to  be  devoutly  studied  by  all : and  we  reverently 
acknowledge  the  Holy  Spirit  speaking  in  the  Scriptures  to  be 
the  Supreme  Judge  in  questions  of  faith  and  duty. 


XX. 

Of  the  Sacraments, 

We  acknowledge  Baptism  and  the  Lord’s  Supper,  the  two 
Sacraments  instituted  by  Christ,  to  be  of  perpetual  obligation, 
as  signs  and  seals  of  the  new  convenant,  ratified  in  His  precious 
blood  ; through  the  observance  of  which  His  Church  is  to  con- 
fess her  Lord  and  to  be  visibly  distinguished  from  the  rest 


60  THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PKESBYTEKIAN  CHURCH. 


of  the  world ; Baptism  with  water  into  the  name  of  the  Father 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost  being  the  sacrament  of 
admission  into  the  visible  Church,  in  which  are  set  forth  our 
union  to  Christ  and  regeneration  by  the  Spirit,  the  remission 
of  our  sins,  and  our  engagement  to  be  the  Lord’s ; and  the 
Lord’s  Supper,  the  sacrament  of  communion  with  Christ  and 
His  people,  in  which  bread  and  wine  are  given  and  received  in 
thankful  remembrance  of  Him  and  of  His  sacrifice  on  the 
Cross,  and  in  which  they  who  in  faith  receive  the  same  do, 
after  a spiritual  manner,  partake  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  to  their  comfort,  nourishment,  and  growth 
in  grace. 

XXI. 

Of  the  Second  Advent. 

We  assuredly  believe  that  on  a day  known  only  to  God,  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  will  suddenly  come  again  from  heaven  with 
power  and  great  glory  ; and  we  look  for  this  second  appearing 
of  our  Saviour  as  the  blessed  hope  of  His  Church,  for  which 
we  ought  always  to  wait  in  sober  watchfulness  and  diligence, 
that  we  may  be  found  ready  at  His  coming. 

XXII. 

Of  the  Resurrection. 

We  believe  that  the  souls  of  the  righteous  enter  at  death 
upon  a state  of  rest  and  felicity  at  home  with  the  Lord  ; and 
we  look  for  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  both  of  the  just  and 
of  the  unjust,  through  the  power  of  the  Son  of  God,  when  the 
bodies  of  all  who  are  fallen  asleep  in  Christ,  as  well  as  of  the 
faithful  who  are  then  alive,  shall  be  fashioned  anew  and  con- 
formed to  the  body  of  His  glory. 

XXHI. 

Of  the  Last  Judgment. 

We  believe  that  God  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness 
by  Jesus  Christ,  before  whom  all  men  must  appear,  who  shall 


THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PRESBYTEEIAN  CHURCH.  61 

separate  the  righteous  from  the  wicked,  make  manifest  the 
secrets  of  the  heart,  and  render  to  every  man  according  to  the 
deeds  which  he  hath  done  in  the  body,  whether  good  or  evil, 
when  the  wicked  shall  go  away  into  eternal  punishment,  hut 
the  righteous  into  eternal  life. 

XXIY. 

Of  the  Life  Everlasting. 

Finally,  we  believe  in  and  desire  the  life  everlasting  in 
which  the  redeemed  shall  receive  their  inheritance  of  glory  in 
the  kingdom  of  their  Father,  and  be  made  fully  blessed  in  the 
presence  and  service  of  God,  whom  they  shall  see  and  enjoy 
forever  and  ever.  Amen. 


DECLARATOKY  STATEMENT. 

Whereas  this  Church  has  ever  acknowledged  the  canonical 
books  of  Holy  Scripture  to  be  her  sole  Supreme  Standard,  to 
which  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith  is  to  be  regarded 
as  subordinate ; 

Whereas  every  endeavor  to  set  forth  in  the  form  of  a Creed 
the  truth  taught  in  Holy  Scripture  must  be  at  the  best  imper- 
fect ; and 

Whereas  every  such  Creed  is  liable  to  become  less  adequate 
to  express  the  Church’s  faith,  through  that  fuller  and  clearer 
apprehension  of  His  revealed  truth  which  it  pleases  God  from 
time  to  time  to  grant  unto  His  Church  ; 

Therefore  it  has  seemed  good  and  needful  to  this  Church,  in 
Synod  assembled,  for  the  better  exhibition  of  her  belief  on  cer- 
tain points,  to  declare  as  follows : 

I. 

That  the  doctrine  of  Redemption  set  forth  in  the  West- 
minster Confession,  particularly  in  its  reference  to  the  election 


C2  THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PEESBYTEEIAN  CHUECH. 


of  some  among  mankind  to  eternal  life,  is  held  and  taught  in 
this  Church,  together  with  other  great  truths  which  are  vital  to 
the  gospel,  such  as 

1,  Tliat  the  love  of  God  to  mankind  moved  Him  to  provide, 
by  the  gift  of  His  Son  to  be  a propitiation  for  the  whole  world, 
a way  of  salvation  which  in  His  gospel  is  freely  offered  to  all ; 

2,  That  God  has  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  any  sinner,  but 
desires  that  all  should  repent  and  live ; and 

3,  That  every  man  who  hears  the  gospel  is  responsible  for 
his  acceptance  or  rejection  of  its  free  offer  of  eternal  life. 


11. 

That  the  teaching  of  the  Confession  on  the  subject  of  man’s 
total  depravity  since  the  Fall,  is  not  to  be  understood  as  deny- 
ing his  responsibility  both  under  the  Law  and  under  the  Gos- 
pel, or  the  existence  and  value  of  the  natural  virtues. 

HI. 

That  while  the  duty  of  proclaiming  the  gospel  to  all  men  is 
clear  and  imperative,  and  while  the  proclamation  of  the  gospel 
is  the  ordinary  means  of  salvation  for  all  who  are  capable  of 
being  called  thereby;  and  while  it  is  certain  that  no  one  is 
saved  except  through  the  mediation  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
and  by  the  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit : yet  it  does  not  follow, 
nor  is  it  required  to  be  held,  either  that  any  who  die  in  infancy 
are  lost,  or  that  God  may  not  extend  His  mercy  to  those  who 
are  beyond  the  reach  of  the  ordinary  means  of  salvation,  as  it 
may  seem  good  in  His  sight. 


lY. 

That  with  reference  to  the  teaching  of  the  Confession  re- 
garding the  duty  of  Civil  Hulers,  this  Church,  while  holding 
that  such  rulers  are  subject  in  their  own  province  to  the  au- 
thority of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  does  not  accept  anything  in 
that  document  which  favors,  or  may  be  regarded  as  favoring, 
intolerance  or  persecution. 


THE  CONFESSION  OF  THE  ENGLISH  PEESBYTEKIAN  CHURCH.  63 


Y. 

That  liberty  of  opinion  is  recognized  in  this  Church  on  such 
points  of  the  Confession  as  do  not  enter  into  the  substance  of 
the  Faith  : the  Church  retaining  full  authority  to  determine  in 
any  case  which  may  arise  what  points  fall  within  this  descrip- 
tion, as  well  as  to  guard  against  any  abuse  of  this  liberty  to  the 
injury  of  her  unity  and  peace. 


Note. — From  a letter  of  Dr.  Dykes,  the  Convener  of  the  Synodical  Committee, 
dated  Dec.  15,  1889,  I learn  that  the  Committee  are  still  at  work  on  the  revision  of 
this  Confession  for  the  next  meeting  of  Synod,  and  that  their  difficulty  is  “ not  at 
all  with  Calvinism,  but  almost  exclusively  on  the  Doctrine  of  Scripture  (as  stated 
in  Art.  XIX.),  which  led  to  an  arrest  of  procedure  last  Synod,  and  to  the  addition  of 
some  members  to  the  Committee  who  were  to  represent  the  conservative  party  in  the 
Church.”  It  seems  that  some  desire  a definition  of  the  mode  and  extent  of  inspira- 
tion (which  the  Westminster  Confession  does  not  give).  Dr.  Dykes  also  sent  me  a 
confidential  report  of  the  Minutes  of  the  Committee  at  meetings  held,  London, 
Nov.  19,  20,  and  21,  1889.  Some  slight  verbal  alterations  were  adopted,  but  action 
on  the  precise  wording  of  Art.  XIX.  was  deferred  to  a future  meeting  in  March, 
1890.  Dr.  Dykes  thus  concludes  his  letter  : “ I am  anxious  to  learn  all  I can  of  the 
progress  of  discussion  and  opinion  on  the  Confession  question  in  the  States ; and 
pray  God  to  guide  your  Church  wisely  in  this  very  difficult  and  hazardous  move- 
ment.” 


64 


ACTION  OF  THE  PEESBTTEET  OF  NEW  TOEK 


DOCUMENT  11. 

ACTION  OF  THE  PRESBYTERY  OF  NEW  YORK. 


The  Presbytery  of  New  York,  the  largest  in  the  United 
States,  if  not  in  the  world,  at  a special  session  held  November 
4,  1889,  after  an  earnest  discussion  of  six  hours,  voted  in  favor 
of  revision  by  an  unexpected  majority  of  sixty-seven  to  fifteen. 
It  answered  the  first  question  of  the  General  Assembly  in  the 
afiirmative,  understanding  the  word  ‘ revision  ’ to  be  used 
broadly,  as  comprehending  any  confessional  change.”  The 
second  question  of  the  General  Assembly,  as  to  the  manner  and 
extent  of  revision,  was  referred  to  a “ Digesting  Committee,” 
composed  of  twelve  ministers  and  elders,  as  follows : 

Ministers  : The  Pevs.  Thomas  S.  Hastings,  Howard  Crosby, 
Pobert  P.  Booth,  Charles  H.  Parkhurst,  C.  L.  Thompson, 
Pobert  F.  Sample,  George  Alexander,  John  C.  Bliss,  and 
Pichard  D.  Harlan  ; and  Elders  : Henry  Day,  John  C.  Tucker, 
and  Moses  W.  Dodd. 

This  Committee  held  four  meetings,  and  presented,  through 
the  Pev.  Dr.  Hastings,  President  of  the  Union  Theological 
Seminary,  a unanimous  report,  which  will  be  discussed  in  spe- 
cial meetings  of  Presbytery,  beginning  on  the  third  Monday 
of  January,  1890.  The  report  covers  all  the  points  under  dis- 
cussion, and  commends  itself  by  its  moderation  and  wisdom. 
If  adopted,  it  will  have  considerable  weight  in  shaping  the  ac- 
tion of  the  General  Assembly.  It  proposes  both  a revision  of 
the  Westminster  Confession  and  the  preparation  of  a “short 
and  simple  creed.”  If  this  proposition  should  be  agreed  upon, 
the  revision  of  the  Confession  (which  is  much  too  long  anyhow) 
can  be  most  easily  accomplished  by  an  elimination  of  the  ob- 
jectionable sentences,  without  an  attempt  at  reconstruction. 


ON  REVISION  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION. 


65 


New  doctrinal  statements  can  be  better  expressed  in  a new 
creed  of  the  living  Church,  in  which,  as  the  report  says,  “the 
love  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord  shall  be  central  and 
dominant.” 


THE  REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE. 

“ The  Committee  which  was  appointed  to  prepare  an  an- 
swer to  the  second  question  of  the  General  Assembly’s  over- 
ture, and  to  submit  that  answer  to  the  Presbytery,  respectfully 
reports : 

“ That  we  have  carefully  considered  the  whole  subject,  and 
have  reached  a conclusion  with  a unanimity  for  which  we  are 
devoutly  thankful.  This  unanimity  resulted  from  concessions 
which  were  made  in  a most  excellent  spirit,  after  a full  and 
free  presentation  of  our  different  personal  views. 

“ Your  Committee  felt  that  it  is  necessary  to  reduce  to  the 
minimum  the  changes  which  different  minds  may  desire,  and 
to  unite  in  asking  only  such  modifications  as  are  necessary  to  re- 
move from  our  Confession  those  statements  which  have  proved 
to  be  stumbling-blocks  to  many  honest  believers. 

“Other  changes,  in  the  judgment  of  the  majority  of  the 
Committee,  would  be  improvements  ; but  we  prefer  to  leave 
them  to  the  wisdom  of  the  General  Assembly,  whose  province 
it  is  to  formulate  such  modifications.  We  think  it  wiser  and 
safer  to  ask  only  that  which  the  general  desire  designates. 
Therefore  your  Committee  recommends  unanimously  the  fol- 
lowing answer  to  the  second  question  of  the  General  x\ssem- 
bly’s  overture : 

“ This  Presbytery  would  regard  with  apprehension  any  at- 
tempts to  remodel  the  Confession  of  Faith,  as  endangering  the 
integrity  of  our  system  of  doctrine.  We  deprecate  most  ear- 
nestly all  such  changes  as  would  impair  the  essential  articles 
of  our  faith  contained  in  that  Confession,  which  has  so  long 
served  as  our  Standard,  and  to  which  we  are  bound  by  so  many 
historic  and  personal  ties.  We  desire  only  such  changes  as 
seem  to  us  urgently  needed  and  generally  asked. 


66 


ACTION  OF  THE  PKESBYTEKY  OF  NEW  YOEK 


“1.  We  desire  that  the  third  chapter,  after  the  first  section^  he 
so  recast  as  to  include  these  things  only : the  sovereignty  of 
God  in  election,  the  general  love  of  God  for  all  mankind,  the 
salvation  in  Christ  Jesus  provided  for  all,  and  to  be  preached 
to  every  creature. 

2.  We  desire  that  the  tenth  chapter  be  so  revised  as  not  to 
appear  to  discriminate  concerning  “ infants  dying  in  infancy,” 
or  so  as  to  omit  all  reference  to  them  (sec.  3) ; and  so  as  to 
preclude  that  explanation  of  sec.  4,  which  makes  it  teach  the 
damnation  of  all  the  heathen,  or  makes  it  deny  that  there  are 
any  elect  heathen  who  are  regenerated  and  saved  by  Christ 
through  the  Spirit,  and  who  endeavor  to  walk  in  penitence  and 
humility,  according  to  the  measure  of  light  which  God  has 
been  pleased  to  grant  them. 

“ While  there  are  other  points  which  the  Presbytery  would 
be  glad  to  see  modified  or  changed — as  conspicuously  chap, 
xxiv.,  sec.  3,  and  chap,  xxv.,  sec.  6 — nevertheless  we  prefer  to 
confine  our  suggestions  for  revision  to  the  third  and  tenth  chap- 
ters, as  above  indicated. 

“ Furthermore,  as  germain  to  the  object  which  the  Assem- 
bly had  in  mind  in  referring  these  questions  to  the  Presby- 
teries, your  Committee  recommends  that  this  Presbytery  over- 
ture the  General  Assembly  to  invite  the  co-operation  of  the 
Presbyterian  and  Keformed  Churches  of  America  and  of  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland  to  formulate  a short  and  simple  creed, 
couched  so  far  as  may  be  in  Scripture  language,  and  containing 
all  the  essential  and  necessary  articles  of  the  Westminster 
Confession,  which  creed  shall  be  submitted  for  approval  and 
adoption  as  the  common  creed  of  the  Presbyterian  and  the  Ke- 
formed Churches  of  the  world. 

“ We  believe  that  there  is  a demand  for  such  a creed,  not 
as  a substitute  for  our  Confession,  but  only  to  summarize  and 
supplement  it  for  the  work  of  tlie  Church.  We  would,  and 
we  must,  retain  our  Standards,  which  we  have  as  our  family 
inheritance,  and  as  the  safeguard  of  our  ministry  and  of  our 
institutions.  But  a brief  and  comprehensive  creed,  at  once 
interpreting  and  representing  those  Standards,  would  be  wel- 


ON  REVISION  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION. 


67 


corned  by  our  churches  as  most  helpful  and  beneficent  for  the 
exposition  of  what  we  have  meant  through  all  these  years  by 
^ the  system  of  doctrine  taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.’  We 
want  no  new  doctrines,  but  only  a statement  of  the  old  doc- 
trines made  in  the  light  and  in  the  spirit  of  our  present  Chris- 
tian activities,  of  our  high  privileges,  and  of  our  large  obliga- 
tions— a statement  in  which  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in 
Christ  Jesus  our  Lord,  shall  be  central  and  dominant. 

“ On  behalf  of  the  Committee : 

Thomas  S.  Hastings,  ChairmanP 


CHURCH  HISTORY 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  With  a View  of  tho 
State  of  the  Roman  World  at  the  Birth  of  Christ.  By 
GEORGE  P.  FISHER,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Church 
History  in  Yale  College.  8vo,  $2.50. 

THE  BOSTON  ADVERTISER.— “ Prof.  Fisher  has  displayed  in  this,  as  in  his 
previous  published  -writings,  that  catholicity  and  that  calm  judicial  quality  of 
mind  which  are  so  indispensable  to  a true  historical  critic.” 

THE  EXAMINER.— “The  volume  is  not  a dry  repetition  of  well-kno-wn  facts. 
It  bears  the  marks  of  original  research.  Every  page  glows  with  freshness  of 
material  and  choiceness  of  diction.” 

THE  EVANGELIST.— “The  volume  contains  an  amount  of  information  that 
makes  it  one  of  the  most  useful  of  treatises  for  a student  in  philosophy  and 
theology,  and  must  secure  for  it  a place  in  his  library  as  a standard  authority.” 

HISTORY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH.  By  GEORGE  P. 
FISHER,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in 
Yale  University.  8vo,  \with  numerous  maps,  $3.50. 

This  work  is  in  several  respects  notable.  It  gives  an  able  presenta- 
tion of  the  subject  in  a single  volume,  thus  supplying  the  need  of  a 
complete  and  at  the  same  time  condensed  survey  of  Church  History. 
It  will  also  be  found  much  broader  and  more  comprehensive  than  other 
books  of  the  kind.  The  following  will  indicate  its  aim  and  scope. 

FROM  THE  PREFACE.— “There  are  two  particulars  in  which  I have  sought 
to  make  the  narrative  specially  serviceable.  In  the  first  place  the  attempt  has 
been  m'<Je  to  exhibit  fully  the  relations  of  the  history  of  Christianity  and  of  the 
Church  to  contemporaneous  secular  history.  * * « i have  tried  to  bring  out 
more  distinctly  thau  is  usually  done  the  interaction  of  events  and  changes  in  the 
political  sphere,  with  the  phenomena  which  belong  more  strictly  to  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal and  religious  province.  In  the  second  place  it  has  seemed  to  me  possible  to 
present  a tolerably  complete  survey  of  the  history  of  theological  doctrine.  * * * 

“ It  has  appeared  to  me  better  to  express  frankly  the  conclusions  to  which  my 
investigations  have  led  me,  on  a variety  of  topics  where  differences  of  opinion 
exist,  than  to  take  refuge  in  ambiguity  or  silence.  Something  of  the  dispassionate 
temper  of  an  onlooker  may  be  expected  to  result  from  historical  studies  if  long 
pursued ; nor  is  this  an  evil,  if  there  is  kept  alive  a warm  sympathy  with  the  spirit 
of  holiness  and  love, ‘wherever  it  is  manifest. 

“As  this  book  is  designed  not  for  technical  students  exclusively,  but  for  intel- 
ligent readers  generally,  the  temptation  to  enter  into  extended  and  minute  discus- 
sions on  perplexed  or  controverted  topics  has  been  resisted.” 


STANDARD  TEXT  BOOKS. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH.  By  PHILIP  SCHAFF, 
D.D.  New  Edition,  re-written  and  enlarged.  Vol.  I.— Apos^ 
tolic  Christianity,  A.D.  1—100.  Vol.  II.— Ante-NIcene  Chris® 
tianity,  A.D.  100—325.  Vol.  III.— Nicene  and  Post-Nicene 
Christianity,  A.D.  311-600.  Vol.  IV.— Mediaeval  Christianity, 
A.D.  590—1073.  8vo,  price  per  vol.,  $4.00. 

This  work  ia  extremely  comprehensive.  All  subjects  that  properly 
belong  to  a complete  sketch  are  treated,  including  the  history  of  Chris- 
tian art,  hymnology,  accounts  of  the  lives  and  chief  works  of  the 
Fathers  of  the  Church,  etc.  The  great  theological,  christological,  and 
anthropological  controversies  of  the  period  are  duly  sketched  ; and  in 
all  the  details  of  history  the  organizing  hand  of  a master  is  distinctly 
seen,  shaping  the  mass  of  materials  into  order  and  system. 

PROF.  GEO.  P.  FISHER,  Of  Yale  College.— "Hr.  Schaff  has  thoroughly  and 
successfully  accomplished  his  task.  The  volumes  are  replete  with  evidences  of  a 
careful  study  of  the  original  sources  and  of  an  extraordinary  and,  we  might  say, 
unsurpassed  acquaintance  with  the  modem  literature— German,  French,  and 
English— in  the  department  of  ecclesiastical  history.  They  are  equally  marked  by 
a fair-minded,  conscientious  spirit,  as  well  as  by  a lucid,  animated  mode  of 
presentation.” 

PROF.  ROSWELL  D.  HITCHCOCK,  D.D.— “In  no  Other  Single  work  of 
Its  kind  with  which  I am  acquainted  will  students  and  general  readers  find  so 
much  to  instruct  and  interest  them.” 

DR.  JUL.  MULLER,  Of  Halle.— "It  is  the  only  history  of  the  first  six  cen- 
turies which  truly  satisfies  the  wants  of  the  present  age.  It  is  rich  in  results  of 
original  investigation.” 

HISTORY  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST,  IN  CHRONOLOCi- 
CAL  TABLES.  A Synchronistic  View  of  the  Events,  Charac- 
teristics, and  Culture  of  each  period,  including  the  History  of 
Polity,  Worship,  Literature,  and  Doctrines,  together  with  t:iVo 
Supplementary  Tables  upon  the  Church  in  America!  «nd  an 
Appendix,  containing  the  series  of  Councils,  Popes,  Patri- 
archs, and  other  Bishops,  and  a full  Index.  By  the  late 
HENRY  B.  SMITH,  D.D.,  Professor  in  the  Union  Theologl-v 
cal  Seminary  of  the  City  of  New  York.  Revised  Editions 
Folio,  $5.00. 

REV.  DR.  W.  G.  T.  SHEDD.— “ Prof.  Smith’s  Historical  Tables  are  wS  best 
that  I know  of  in  any  language.  In  preparing  such  a work,  with  so  much  care  and 
research,  Prof.  Smith  has  furnished  to  the  student  an  apparatus  that  will  be  of 
life-long  service  to  him” 

REV.  DR.  WILLIAM  ADAMS.— “ The  labor  expended  upon  such  a work  is 
Immense,  and  its  accuracy  and  completeness  do  honor  to  the  research  and 
scholarship  of  its  author,  and  are  an  invaluable  acquisition  to  our  literature.” 


